252

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, N O . 3, MARCH 1 9 8 4

Equivalent Edge Currents for Arbitrary Aspects of Observation

ARIE MICHAEL1

Abswacr-Explicit expressions for equivalent edge currents are derived for an arbitrary local wedge angle and arbitrary directions of illumination and observation. Thereby the method of equivalent currents (MEC) is completed as apracticallyapplicabletheory of theelectromagnetic on high-frequency diffraction by edges. The derivation is based an asymptoticrelationshipbetween thesurfaceradiationintegral of the physical theory of diffraction (PTD) and the line radiation integral of MEC, and the resulting expressions are deduced from the exact solutions of the canonical wedge problem.

I. INTRODUCTION
T IS KNOWN that the major disadvantage of the geometrical theory of diffraction (GTD) [ 11 , which has not been removed by itsuniform versions [2] [3], is theprediction of infinite fields at caustics. This situation is often encountered in practice when dealing with backscatter calculations from bodies of revolution at aspects close to rotation axis. Two theories were proposed to overcomethis shortcoming of the GTD. One is the physical theory of diffraction (PTD) set forth by Ufimtsev [4]. The other is the method of equivalent currents (MEC) suggested independently by a number of authors [S] -[9]. A comparison of the two theories with the GTD was made by Knott and Senior [IO]. ThePTD is anintegrative technique in which the physical optics current on a discontinuous surface of a perfect conductor isrefined by the addition of a so-called nonuniform component due to the presence of the (edge) discontinuity. Since highfrequency diffraction is a local phenomenon, the vicinity of any point of the edge is regarded as a fragment of an infinite wedge tangent to the body surfaceat this point, and the actual nonuniformcomponent is approximated by theoneappropriate to this wedge. Also. the incident wave may be regarded as locally plane for any small portion of the edge. This permits the use of the expressions for the surface current derived from the canonical wedge problem [I 11. However,theseexpressionsare very complicated: they contain contour integration in the complex plane. andonly in the special case of a half-plane do theyreduce to closed form expressions containing the well-known Fresnel integrals.This is the main reason whythePTDintegrationapproach is very seldom useful for practical calculations. The MEC is also an integrative technique dealing withradiation integrals. The source of the diffracted field is now ascribed to fictitious equivalent currents. both electric and magnetic, flowing along the edge. As a result, the MEC calculation procedure involves only line integrals, as distinct from the surface integrals of thePTD. Also, the expressionsfor the equivalent currents, in the few special cases where they have been known up to now,
~

Manuscript received March 30. 1983. The author is with the Electromagnetic Research Department, Armament Development Authority. P. 0. Box 2250. Haifa 31021, Israel.

are relatively simple. These features tend to make the MEC much more suitable for practical calculations than the PTD. Unfortunately, the expressions for the equivalent currents, which dependonthedirection of observation, havebeenderived only for directionslying on the Keller cone of diffracted rays [ l ] [ l 11 fora given point on the edge. This means that, for a given edge and given directions of incidence and scattering, the values of these currents could be found only at a few points on the edge, which are the points of diffraction according to the GTD. An exception is the specific case of axial incidence on a circular edge, with the observation point lying also on the axis; then theequivalent currents can be evaluated at every point on the edge andthe MEC integration is trivial. However, in most of the cases of interest, the equivalent currents along the .edge remained unknownanda rigorous application of the MEC has been impossible. In order to overcomethis difficulty,KnottandSenior [lo] suggested a generalization of the expressions for equivalent currents to include arbitrary directions of observation. However, theirproposal is merely a postulateand is not based onany mathematical derivation or physically plausible argument.The few published examples of application of the MEC to the diffraction by circular edges [9] -[13] referred to a close vicinity of the axial caustic. In this situation, the results are only weakly sensitive tothe particulargeneralization ofthe expression for equivalent currents. Moreover, to the same extent of accuracy, these currents can be ascribed the (rigorously determined) values appropriate to the exact axial incidence and scattering. Thus, in order to make the MEC a general method capable ofcovering all situations where the ray technique of the GTD fails, it is necessary toobtain rigorous asymptotic expressions for equivalent currentsforarbitrary directions of observations. This goal is achieved in the present work. In Section I1 a proper relationship is established betweenthePTD, MEC, andGTD. It is explained that the soughtforexpressionsmust be derived notfromthe GTD.which is a narrowertheorythanthe MEC, but from the PTD, which is a wider one. The proposed derivation is based on identifying the MEC line integral with the asymptotic edge contribution to the surfaceintegral of the PTD. Explicit expressions for equivalent currents are derived in Section I11 for an arbitrary wedge angle. I t turns outthat,contrarytothe previous approaches,the electric equivalent current depends not only on the incident electric field tangent to the edge, but also on the corresponding magnetic field. This is true for all directionsofobservation not on the Keller cone of diffraction. However in the case of the backscattering from a ring discontinuity, the radiationintegral over the electric current component depending on the magnetic field vanishes by \+rue ofsymmetry.Furthermore, in this special but practically important case, the resulting field is the same as if the expressions of Knott and Senior [ 101 were used.

MICHAELI: ARBITRARY ASPECTS OF OBSERVATION

253
For the MEC to become a calculational tool for such situations, the values of I and M should be known at any point on the integration curve C. In other words: expressions for the equivalent currents should be derived for arbitrary directions of incidence and observation with respect to the tangent to the edge. The lacking expressions for I and M needed for such situations can obviously not be obtained from the GTD, and a wider theory should be invoked for this purpose. The proposed generalization of (6) by Knott and Senior [ 101 consistingin the mere replacement of 0' by 0 for 0 # 0 (however, retaining the factor ' I/sin 0 in D,and Dl,) has already been criticized in Section I. ' Returningto firstprinciples, one canpresent thescattered far field from the surface containing the edge C in the form

11. RELATIONSHIP AMONG THE MEC, GTD, AND PTD

I According to the MEC, the diffracted field ? due to an edge discontinuity C is given forthe Fresnel and farzones by the radiation integral [ 1 I ]

Zd-jk [ZI(F)s^

(iX i) M(?)s^ .+

21 G(?', 7) dl,

(1)

where k is the wavenumberof the incident wave; 2 is the impedance of the medium; i and 7 are the position vectors of the on C, respectively; dl = point ofobservation andofapoint Id;' I is the increment of arc length I along C; i = d;'/dl is the tangent unit vector;

s^ =s' /

= (i- )/I ?'

; r" I observation of

(2)
the radiating edge element

is thedirectionof at 7;

i = l Si

G(r", 7) = exp (-jks)/4m (3) where integration is performed over the two surfaces,+S1 and S2, on both sides of their commonboundary C, and is the is the three-dimensional Green's function; ?(?) = I(?)? and induced current on the surface Si.If the field point r' is not on 2(?) M(?)? are the electric and magnetic equivalent currents, a causticof thescatteredfield,then, in the limit k .+ 00, the = respectively. It is assumed thatthe values of Z? and M(?) () radiation integral in (7) can be reduced asymptotically to a sum depend linearly on the incident electric and magnetic field of ray field contributions (isolated) from interior statioyry intensities, E' and Hi, Then the phase factor exp [-jW@)] phase points on S1 and S2 (if there are any)andaboundary at?. describing the spatial variation of E' and Hienters the integrand contribution expressed bp a line integral along C. Theformer in ( I ) via Z and M . The total phase variationof theintegrand can be recognized as the reflected ray fields and the latter should along C is thusincorporated in 9(7) I? - 71. In the high- then be identifiedwiththe + edge diffracted field given by (1). frequency limit, k .+ =, the integral in (1) can be asymptotically Thus the MEC can be related to the rigorous asymptotic radiaevaluated by themethodofstationary phase (if thepoint of tion theory and thereby to the PTD. In order to cast the relationobservation is not on a caustic). The points of stationary phase ship between the MEC and the PTD into a mathematically exare determined from the equation plicit form, we will make use of the physically apparent statement t^ $ / [ 9 ( i ' ) I i- i+' I ] = 0 (4) thatthe edge diffraction is mainly duetothe surface currents concentrated on narrow strips of S1 and S2 along C. The subseor quent analysis resembles the one performed by Keller et a1 [I41 for diffraction by an aperture in a plane screen. Let x1 and x2 P = of, where p' = +cos-' is the angle betweenthedirectionof inci- be the distances from C along the two normals to C tangent to dence 5' = V , , 9 and the edge, and 6 = COS-^(^^*^) is a similar thesurfaces SI and S 2 , respectively, and pointing to these surangle forthedirectionof observation. Equation ( 5 ) expresses faces. Taking xi and Z as integration variables in the stripbelonging Keller's lawof diffraction [ l ] . It defines aforwardcone of to Si(i = 1 2): one can present the edge diffracted part of the observationdirectionswhich is recognized as the Keller cone field E in the form of diffracted rays. Thus, the MEC radiationintegralreduces, via the method of stationary phase, toa sum of ray field contributionsfromthe (isolated) diffraction points on C satisfying ( 5 ) . Since these contributions are known the from GTD, the expressions for Jacobian of transformation from local where Ji(l, xi) is the Z and M atadiffractionpoint can beobtained in astraightCartesian coordinates on the surface element dSi to the variables forward way. These expressions are 1: xi: andthe absence of the upper limit on the xi integration denotes that only the asymptotic endpoint contribution at xi = 0 is taken into account. The asymptotic high-frequencyevaluationof the integralsover+xi dependsonly on the rapid phase variation incorporated in jj(Z, xi) and GP(1, x i ) , T), whereas 1 and Ji are slowly varying functionsof xi. Tbereforethelatter may be replaced by their values at xi = 0, i.e., on C. According Ds(Dl,) to our definition of Z and xi, where Y = 1/Z is the admittance of the medium: and is the soft (hard) scalar diffractioncoefficient [2] given by the Ji(Z, 0) = 1, i = 1, 2. (9) GTD. Thus, given (6), the theory of equivalent currents incorporates the GTD as its corollary whenever the point of observaThe Green's function can be approximated for small xi as tion is not too close to a caustic. However, it is a wider theory G(;'(Z, xi), i ) G(?', T) IC exp (jkxi2i 5). (10) than GTD the in thatit encompasses situations wherein the radiation integral in (1) cannot be evaluated by the method where G F , ?)Ic E G(?(Z, 0), ?) is its value on C, and 2' is the of stationary phase. unit vector in the xi direction. Performing all the above approxi-

jzp)

254
mations in (8) and comparing the one deduces the following relation:

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. NO. AP-32,

3, MARCH I984

resulting expression

to (I),
>

YI

ZI(Z)i x ( x 3) s

+ M(Z$ x f
:I, x i ) exp (jkxiii 3) d r i .
I-1

The scalar products of (1 1) with X i and s X

2

(iX ?)yield

(11)

M(I) =.
i=1

Mi(Z),

I(Z) =

2 I#),
i= 1

where
0

Fig. 1. Wedge scattering geometry. The dashed lines are the projections of the directions of incidence and observation on the xy-plane.

Then

(13)
where

M I = -ZKx sin @/sin p, I , = K, - K, cot p cos @,

~i(0 =

~ ( z ,xi>exp (jkxiii

hi.

(14)

where

K,,, = i,,, exp (ihsin 6 cos dx (18) Since only a small vicinity of x i = 0 is involved in the evaluation of the integral in (14), the actual surface current in (14) can be approximated by thePTDcurrentappropriateto an infiniteand i,, iz are taken at Z = 0. Thesurface current i, is related wedge as mentioned in Section 1. n u s (12)-(14)express the to thetotal magnetic field ontheupper face bytheboundary equivalent edge currents in terms of the PTD surface currents.condition The calculationof I and M is now reduced totheexplicitasympjl = j X = 0) totic endpoint evaluation of the integral in (14) for a canonical wedge problem. or

2(y

111. DERIVATION O F EQUIVALENT CURRENTS FOR A WEDGE Consideraplane electromagnetic wave propagatingin the i direction and incident on a perfectly conducting infinite wedge with an exterior angle I%. Our aim is to obtain explicit expressions for I and M at a point Oon the edge for an arbitrary direction of observation The geometry of the problem is depicted in Fig. 1. The point O in question is chosen as the origin. The x axis is directed along the normal to theedge lying on the upper y axiscoincides withtheexternal faceoftheedge,andthe normalto thisface. The z axis is directed along the edge, so as to form a right-hand system. The angles between the i and i directions and the edge are

i, = H A Y

For the case under consideration, the total field depends on z only through the factor exp (-jkz cos 0). Then the Maxwell equations

V X E = -jkZz,
X= ;

a.

can be employed to express H , in terms of the z-components of the total field as follows:

H, =-

p = cos-I (i ?), p= cos-1

(s

i).

(15)

The angle between the upper face and the edge-fixed plane of incidence containing the vectors 3 and i is Q. The corresponding angle for the edge-fixed plane of observation is @. We will now derive the expressions for the contributions I , , M , fromtheupper face tothe equivalent currents.Theexpressions for Z2, M2 dueto the lower face will then result immediately. We start with (13), (14) for i = 1, replacing ? by t a n d x l by x, putting Z = z = 0, and substituting the Cartesian decompositions

We now make use of the canonical solutions to the wedge problem in order to relate E,, Hz to the z-components of the incident field at 0, and HLo, as follows [l I ] : Eio

E, =E:,

H z
where

x = kp sin p,
p and $ are the polar coordinates of the plane, and

= 0 , j z = -H,(y 1

= 0. )

(19)

jkYi?

jk

sin2

ax

[~(x, $-9)-u(X,

9 + @)I,
(21)

Hto[u(X, -0) + u(x,$ f @)I, $

(22)
field point in the xy-

MICHAELI: ARBITRARY ASPECTS O F OBSERVATION

255
Then the final results for M and I are

i"

sin [(T - ~1 )/Ar] (Nn + sin sin a2 Q) cos [(n- CY])/N]- cos (Q'/N) sin [(n- a,)/NI cos [(n- ,')/A'] + cos (@'/N)

Fig. 2.

Contour of integration for the canonical wedge problem.

1.

Using (1 8)-(23) in (1 7), we get cos [I - CYl)/N] - cos (Qf/N) (I

p1 cot p' - cot 0 cos Q

sin [(n- a,

)/lv

sin
k sin p'

C Y '

cos [(n-CY,)/Nl -cos(QYN)

a x
..
sin [(n- a2)/1V]

where p , = sin (3 cos @/sinp'

cos [(n- a')/Aq

+ cos (Q'lN)

-Hl

2j(pl cot 0 - cot p COS 4) '

k sin $sin a1

Equations (31), together with (25): (27), and (30), are very cumbersome; however, they involve onlyelementaryfunctions and therefore pose no problems for numerical calculations. They can be considerably simplified for p = ( 'and for p = n - p'. The 3 first case corresponds to the forward coneofobservationdirections, i.e., the Keller cone of diffraction (see ( 5 ) and the related discussion in Section 11). The second case corresponds to the backward cone of directions.The practical importance of this case is that it includes the backscatter direction. In both cases (25) and (27) simplify to = cos 9, = 9. (32)

11 .'

C Y '

where
cyI

= cos-' p 1 = - j ~n (p

+d m ) .
-1 < p < 1
p<-I.

(27)

The square root in (27) is positive for p > 1 , and its values for p < 1 are fixed by the branch cuts shown in Fig. 3, so that

d p / j1-1, =
-1-1,
sin
=

(28)

In accordance with this choice of the branch,

I@ = 0 )= g o '
(29)
. t

2jY sin (n/N)

Nk sin2 p'

In order to obtain the expressions for M 2 and I2 from (26), one has t o replace (3 by n - fl,p' by n - fl', Q' by IVII- 4' and a1 by = cos-' p 2 , where

CY'

v '

= sin p cos (Nn -@)/sin

p'.

(30)

256

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS A N D PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 3, MARCH 1 9 8 4

Theequationsfor M and I are also considerablysimplified in the case of a half-plane, i.e., when hr= 2. In this case p2 = p l ,a2 = cyl,and we get from (31)
I

-F: -I branch cuts

-I

Rep

M = ~j~

2 a z sin 4, cos (0/2)

COS 4, f

jk sin (sin

sin 0

COS 4)

sin p
* ( sinp-sinpcos4,

y 2 >

Fig. 3.

Branch cuts for the definition of

m.
I=

whichcoincide with familiar equations (6) when Kellers [ 11 expressions for D, and DI, substituted therein. are For p = n - p one gets

~j~

2 4 3 sin (4,,72)(sin 0 - sin P cos 911/ ~

2 f l j cos Q cos (4/2)(sin2

k (sin p)3/2 (sin 13 COS Q, + sin p COS 4)

.
+

p cos p - sin2 0cos 0)

M(0 = 71 - p) = M(P = $1,

*

k (sin p>3/2 sin p (sin p cos Q + sin

a cos 4,)

(~p-sinpcos4,)-~~.

I(p=n-p)=IG(1=p)-~~o--c

. 41 cot$ Nk sin 0

- cot (NIT - 4,)sin [ (n + 4,)/N]

cos [(n+ 4,)/lV] - cos ($/AT) Finally,forthe case ofbackscattering 2jZ sin (n/N)
Mback

.I

cot 4, sin [(n- 4,)/N] cos [(n- 4,)/N] - cos (QjlV)

For backscattering (0 = IT - O, Q = 4) one obtains Z(1 + cos 4,) i Iback = H ~ O j k sin2 p~ cos

1.

Iback=E:O

(35)

Y (cos Q - 1) 2 cos (1 + cos 4,) - Hio jk sin2 0 cos 4 jk sin2 p sin 4, (38)
IV. CONCLUSION

onegetsfrom

(34) and

= HjO

+
Iback =

cos (n/N)- cos (2#N)

1.

2jY sin (np)

1
COS (n/N)- COS (&/N)

cot Q sin [ - . ( Q)/N] cos [(n- Q ) / N ]

-H;o

. 4j cotp

Mc Sin p

- cos (4,/N)

Note that except for the Keller cone of diffracted rays, the electricequivalent currentcontainsatermproportionaltothe edge component of the incident magnetic field. However, in the case of backscattering froma ring discontinuity,the radiation integral due to this term vanishes. This can be shown explicity, but it also follows immediately from the symmetry of the problem. Indeed, assume that the incident waveis electrically polarized in the azimuthal plane. Then, if the integral in question did not vanish, there would appearaperpendicularcomponent of thebackscattered electric field, which would violate thesymmetry. A similar argument applies in the case of magnetic polarization in the azimuthal plane. I t then follows from (35) or (36) that the backscattered field in this case is the same as calculated withthe aid oftheexpressions proposed by Knott and Senior [lo] . This result, however,does not apply to bistatic scattering.

We have derived explicit expressions for equivalent currents on an arbitrary edge for an arbitrary aspect of observation. The derivation is based on an asymptotic relationship betweenthe surface radiation integral of the PTD and the line radiation integral of the MEC in the high-frequency h i t . Theexpressions are deduced the from exact solutions the of canonical wedge problem; hence they arerigorous to the same extent as the GTD. The equations obtained a for general wedge angle and a general aspect of observationare rather cumbersome. However, they involve onlyelementaryfunctionsandtherefore pose no problems for numerical calculations. They simplify considerably fortwo cones observation of directions: the fonvard, or the Keller, cone of diffracted rays and the backward cone including the backscatter direction. the For forward cone, our results reduce to the familiar expressions [ l o ] derived from the GTD. Another simplification of our equations occurs in the case of an edge in a plane screen. For directions of observation not on the Keller cone,the electric equivalent currentcontainsatermproportional to the edge component of the incident magnetic field. This is also true for the backward cone. However, in the latter case the expressions for the equivalent currents are-except forthe above coupling term-the same as for the forward cone. In the special case of backscattering from a ring discontinuity, the radiation integral due to thisterm vanishes byvirtue of symmetry, and the fmal result is the same as calculated with the aid of the expressions proposed by Knott and Senior 101 . [ Finally: we note that our expressions predict infinite currents forcertaindirections of observation.This isanalogous to the divergence of the GTD expressions on theshadowand reflection boundaries. However, there is no simple physical interpretation for the divergence directions outside the Keller cone.It would be interesting to develop a uniform theory of equivalent currents that would remove the above infinities just as the uniform theory of diffraction [2] removes the infinities of the GTD.

MICHAELI: ARBITRARY ASPECTS OF OBSERVATION

257

I
Fig. 4. Distortedcontour of integrationforthecanonicalwedge problem. The dashed line is the locus of the roots of the equation cos + p=Ofor-m<p<m.

APPENDIX I any For We now proceed with the integral

u1=

to evaluating the integrals in (24) and start

real p , equation this has a single root within the closed contour r :which lies on the contour shown by the dashed line " in Fig. 4. The root is given by T - a where

NX,a) exp (jxp)dx

sin ( W ) exp [iX (cos t + P)l 4 d X , (39) cos ( [ / N )- cos ( @ / N )

a = c0s-l p = -i In ( p

+d m ) ,
~

(45)

where r is the contour shown in Fig. 2. If the order of integration in (39) is reversed, the integration over X becomes trivial: exp

1& 1

where the square root is taken to be positive for 1.1 > 1 and its analytic continuation to the complexp-plane is determined by the branch cuts in Fig. 3. cancels the sumThe sum of the residues of the integral at [,* mation term in (43). and we get

i [ix(cos [ + p)] d~ = cos [ + p

(40)

-i u, =-

A '

sin

[(a - a)/N]

cos [(7i- a)/AT]

One

- cos ( Q N ) sin 01

-. 1

(46)

However: for this reversal to be legitimate, the integral in (40) should converge at X + + 03 for all on the contour of integration in the [-plane. This condition is not fulfilled on r. Therefore we will distort r to I" as shown in Fig. 4 . This distortion may be accompanied by crossing the poles of the integrand in the interval 0 < [ < a , and therefore the corresponding residues should be added to the integral after the distortion. Thus,

In a similar fashion

can

U,

ax

exp ( j X p ) dX

cot -- a N cos

sin

[(a - a ) / N ]

[(a - &)/lV] - cos ( @ / A T )

(47)

Finally: the integral

+
n

exp ( i X cos t n ) ,

(41)

where

[ are the roots of the equation ,

can be calculated after an integration by parts in ,,ields

cos ( [ / N )- cos ( @ / N )= 0 satisfying the condition 0 < ln < a. (39), theorder of integration If we nowsubstitute(41)into may be reversed and we obtain
1
u1=-

aula@, which

2aN

l,

sin ( V @)
(@V) COS (@/A:)] -

[COS

(cos $ f p)

att(x,a) --sin ( @ / N ) x a@ 2aN

I

258
REFERENCES

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. AP-32, NO. 3, MARCH 1984 diffractiontechniques, Proc. IEEE, vol. 62, pp. 1468-1474, Nov. 1974. G . L. James, Geometrical Theory o Diffraction f o r Electromagnetic f Waves, H e m . SGI IHQ. England:PeterPeregrinus Ltd., 1976, pp. 8-250. W. D. Burnside and L. Peters, Jr., Axial-radar cross section of finite cones by the equivalent current conceptwith higher order diffraction, Radio S c i . , vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 943-948, Oct. 1972. Edge diffracted fields, caustic IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat.. vol. AP-22, pp. 62G-623; July 1974. J.B. Keller, R. M. Lewis, and D. B. Seckler,Diffraction by an aperture. 11, J . Appf. Phys., vol. 28, pp. 57fL579, May 1957.

[31 I41

[71

r91

J. B. Keller, Geometrical theory of diffraction, J . Opt. Soc. Am., vol. 52, pp. 116-130, 1962. P. H.Pathak and R. G. Kouyoumjian, A uniform geometrical theory Proc. of diffraction for an edge in a perfectly conducting surface, IEEE, vol. 62, pp. 1448-1461, Nov. 1974. R. M.Lewisand J . Boersma,Uniformasymptotictheory of edge diffraction, J . Math. Phys., vol. 10, pp. 2291-2305, 1969. P. Y. Ufimtsev,Method of edgewaves in thephysicaltheoryof diffraction, (from the Russian Metod krayevykh voln v fizicheskoy teoriidifraktsii, Izd-vo Sov. Radio, pp. 1-243, 1962), translation prepared by the U.S. Air Force Foreign Technology Division, WrightPatterson AFB, OH, released for public distribution Sept. 7, 1971. P. C. Clemmov, Edge currents in diffraction theory, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-4, pp. 282-287, July 1956. R. F. Millar, An approximate theory of the diffraction ofan electromagnetic wave by an aperature in a plane screen,Proc. Inst. Elec. Eng., vol. 103 (pt. C), pp. 177-185, Mar. 1956. - Thediffraction ofan electromagnetic wave by acircular aperture, Proc. Insf. Elec. Eng., vol. 104, (pt. C), pp. 87-95, Mar. 1957. -, The diffraction ofan electromagnetic wave by a large aperture, Proc. Ins?. Elec. E n g . , vol. 104. (pt. C), pp. 240-250. Sept. 1957. C. E. Ryan, Jr., and L. Peters, Jr., Evaluation of edge-diffracted fieldsincludingequivalentcurrentsforthecausticregions, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-17, pp. 292-299, May 1960. (See also correction, vol. AP-18, p. 275, Mar. 1970.) E. F. Knott and T. B. A. Senior, Comparison of three high-frequency

[111

[ 121

[I31 [I41

-.

Arie Michaeli wasbornin Riga, USSR, on November 3, 1945. He received the Diploma (M.S. degree) in physics from the Moscow State University in 1968, and the D.Sc. degree in physics from theTechnion, Israel Institute of Technology, in 1977. Since then he has worked at the Electromagnetic Research Department of Raphael. Armament DevelopmentAuthority,inHaifa,Israel.Currently, he is conducting research on electromagnetic scattering.