Velocity of propagation in lossy media

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the propagation velocity of plane waves in lossy media, particularly focusing on a formula for alpha and beta constants in good conductors. The formula, which equates alpha and beta, is validated across various texts and is essential for calculating skin effect. A specific example from David Cheng's book suggests a propagation velocity of 720 m/sec for copper at 3 MHz, which contradicts the expected velocity of about 200,000 km/sec in copper transmission lines. The confusion arises from the interpretation of beta as the phase constant, leading to a distinction between the behavior of lossy and lossless media. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the complexities of wave propagation in conductive materials and the significance of skin depth in understanding these phenomena.
pboric
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
regarding plane waves theory and their properties, for lossy media (conductors) in different books appear a formula that represent alfa y beta constants in the followig way:

alfa = beta = root square( pi*frequency*mu*sigma) valid for good
conductors (high loss material)

I have checked this formula in different books and it works well, and
it's used further to calculate skin effect as well

My question arises from one conclusion derived from the formula, that I
found in just a specific book (David Cheng's Fundamentals of
engineering electromagnetics).
In that book the author says:
velocity of propagation = omega / beta
For copper (good conductor):
sigma = 5.8 * 10 exp 7
mu = 4 *pi *10 exp -7
and therefore v = 720 m/sec. @ f = 3 Mhz.

so the velocity of propagation is << c

I am confused with the final result, because I've checked the formula, and the math in the example is right, but I know that in a copper transmission line, the velocity of propagation is about 2/3 c = 200,000 km/sec.
The formula appears in different books, but the specific example just
appears in Cheng's book
I think the application for the example is valid in a different situation,
but I can't figure out which
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think beta here is what other books refer to as the wavenumber
k=2*pi/lambda
Since omega=2*pi*f, the formula is actually the familiar one
c=lambda*f
 
in lossy media, beta is the phase constant, and alfa is the attenuation constant.
the complex propagation constant gamma is defined = alfa + j * beta
in this case the wavenumber k is complex as well, and it is related to gamma by
gamma = j *k

for lossless media, alfa = 0 and there are no losses at all, just phase change (beta) and in that special case (alfa = 0), we get:
gamma = j*beta = j*k
so beta =k
 
Copper is not a "lossy" conductor".
In a lossy conductor the wave goes (almost) nowhere slowly.
That is why it is called skin depth.
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top