Lecture 3g -- Scattering from an Interface Oblique Incidence

This video covers plane wave scattering at an interface at oblique incidence. In this case waves can refract so law of refection and Snell's law are described to calculate angles. Reflection and transmission are described by the Fresnel equations, which also depend on polarization. Power reflection and transmission is also discussed.

[@TheAnbyrley]

Much better than most 2D presentations in textbooks

[@empossible1577]

I agree! Electromagnetics is fundamentally 3D and I think most intuitively taught in 3D.

[@tensorbundle]

Hi prof. thank you for your video. Nicely explained. Looks like we both enjoy teaching. Yeah, it really deepens our own insight when we explain complicated things to others. I have been running an antenna design and EM channel for seven years.

[@empossible1577]

I will check it out.

[@tensorbundle]

CEM Lectures thank you prof. I also sent you a formal inquiry email from my IEEE ID for PhD under you in Fall 2019 at U.Texas. If you kindly have time to look at my resume there, it would matter a lot for me.

[@mandeepjangra7611]

Conduting media or dielectric media

[@empossible1577]

@@mandeepjangra7611 Dielecric

[@hellopomelo2]

Hi Prof, so just to confirm if what i’m learning is correct: So assume we have a wave with direction k entering a medium. From k we obtain the plane of incidence(the plane parallel to k), and from there on, break up the direction of E into its normal and tangental components wrt to the plane of incidence, and from thereon derive the fresnel equations from the boundary equations and snell’s law? Thanks!

[@empossible1577]

Sounds like you got it!

[@hellopomelo2]

Ah i see. Thanks Prof! Appreciate the reply 😁

[@mishuk2008]

at 11:45 why the electric field vectors for incident, reflected, and transmitted waves should have both the x and the y component? I am asking because, before the derivation it has been assumed that the interface is the z=0 (xy) plane, the plane of incidence y=0 (xz) plane. The wave vector \vec{k} has x and z components. The incidence field is TE-polarized i.e. along \hat{y} direction. Therefore the field vectors should only have y-components. To add to that this is the reason why \vec{k} doesn't have a y-component. Right? Thank you in advance!

[@empossible1577]

If the plane of incidence is in the xz plane, the wave vector is confined to the xz plane. Therefore, ky=0. I don't think I am doing to the analysis for just the TE polarization. I am doing both so analyzing both x and y components of the electric field. If I said the analysis was just for TE, I goofed.

[@auditt1528]

Typo in Slide 5: mag(K_inc) = squareroot((k_x)^2 + (k_y)^2 + (k_z)^2) mag(K_inc) = omega * squareroot(mu*epsilon)

[@empossible1577]

You are right! Thank you!! Fortunately, this error was caught and corrected in the latest version of the notes, but I have not yet rerecorded the videos. Here is a link to the official course website so you can see the latest version of all the notes. empossible.net/academics/emp3302/

[@Kevin-mk4iv]

There are something wrong with slide 15

[@empossible1577]

Can you be more specific?

[@romanrakhmanov4811]

@@empossible1577 I think Kevin, meant that dispersion equations on the top half of slide 15, do not match the ones on the bottom. wave vector lengths are not squared in one case

[@empossible1577]

@@romanrakhmanov4811 Oh, yes. There were mistakes on the slide. The latest version of the notes is available on the official course website. This mistake was corrected some time ago. I just have not yet rerecorded the video. empossible.net/academics/emp3302/