Glare (1):

In the context of matching for both Optical and ordinary RF
applications encountered in the Ham Shack; it is meant to be described
as the unwanted reflection of energy (or power, or what-have-you).

Glare (2):

In the context of the physiological response to observing unwanted
reflections; it is meant to be described by applications that give
rise to this annoyance. This can sometimes be confused with the first
meaning of Glare that is suitable close, but can come into conflict
with that meaning.

Glare, and Glare reduction:

When the topic of Glare is expressed in regard to the second usage, it
is always wavelength specific, and application specific. In fact this
is true of both meanings, but the commercial marketplace overwhelms by
example in the second. With that in mind, we have to consider WHO is
being served by Glare reduction. This is often the naive public who
would otherwise be encumbered by Glare where their attention is drawn
to it as it masks what is trying to be presented to them.

So, Glare masks the perception by reflections of light from, most
usually, a pane of glass, plexiglass, or acrylic (and so on down the
line) that covers or windows an exhibit. Usually we are speaking of
covered art work, or display cases exhibiting samples or products
(this being the most common form of Glare reduction application).

The quickest and most absolute method of Glare reduction in a showcase
window on the street looking into a storefront is to simply tilt the
window at the top, toward the viewer. This renders all light source
reflections (typically higher than the head of the viewer) down. Ten
or twenty degrees of tilt is often enough to give the illusion of
there being no glass at all. Note my usage of "illusion" as Glare is
all about perception in this second usage. This form of Glare
reduction is wide-band and exhibits very little sensitivity to
wavelength. The same Glare reduction of tilting glass covered artwork
is also suitable for the same reason. However, I would point out that
in such cases, the display staff make every effort that the lights be
spotted on the artwork, otherwise if your face is illuminated, the
artwork suddenly becomes a mirror.

Where both meanings of Glare converge for the same purposes, we find a
more specific remedy. Specific because it employs tuned interfaces to
reduce (not eliminate) reflections.

Here is where the convergence demands two different wavelength
specifications, and importantly WHY. As I have offered elsewhere,
there are two types of vision, Photopic and Scotopic (with a third,
Mesopic, between the two which is the process of accommodation of
migrating from one to the other - "acquiring" night vision is a
commonplace description).

Anti-Glare materials that employ thin-film technologies seek to
accommodate the major sources of Glare that fall into these two wide
band regions of 550nM and 510nM. They are also application specific
in that there are two forms of common illumination involved that
compounds this to a four way solution. Those sources of illumination
are Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium lamps. There are others,
certainly, but these specie exhibit characteristics that are
extrapolated to similar sources.

Metal Halide lamps exhibit a comb of resonances, as does the High
Pressure Sodium, that makes Glare elimination impossible. However, it
does not make it impractical as among those major lines of emission,
the optical engineer can select the biggest contributor such as 510nM
for the night vision component of the eye's response. However, this
doesn't make much sense because it also reduces the eye's ability to
perceive what is being illuminated by that wavelength too. Not much
night vision advantage in that, is there? However, when considering
this is placed over artwork commonly, artwork exhibits a Lambertian
distribution of reflected light, not a specular form of reflection.
Hence the specular form exhibited by a pane of glass is reduced and
the Lambertian reflection emerges with a greater contrast (another
benefit of choosing anti-Glare products).

High Pressure Sodium, on the other hand, has a very strong line at the
610nM wavelength. This, too, would be a natural thin-film wavelength
selection. In regards to night vision, such a reflection (that is,
without Glare reduction) would be nearly invisible anyway. As such,
its use would be oriented towards those WHO have a light adapted eye,
that are in a darkened viewing situation.

However, as described, these are very poor solutions to the problem
they attempt to answer. This is because these sources exhibit a comb
of such wavelengths in their emissions. It follows that one
interference layer may impact one line, but certainly not all (there
being easily a dozen lines of emission for either source in either
light adapted vision). Hence we have the multi-layer methods that my
quote offered from the marketplace.

It should come as no surprise that anti-Glare products are wholly
useless under common tungsten lighting whose bandwidth is broad and
continuous. There is one exception, and it is commonly found for
computer screen reflection reduction. I must note that such reduction
has absolutely nothing in common with wavelength interference.

This class of reflection reduction employs a wide band light
reduction. Principally it seeks to reduce all ambient light from
striking the display's surface and then reducing the reflections even
further. This is a double whammy, where the display suffers it only
once. However, you can control the brightness of the display to
replace that loss, and in this sense you have increased your
signal+noise/noise ratio.

Finally there is one source of reflection elimination that is common
to both the optical engineer and the rf engineer (and apparently
wholly unknown by binary engineers). I offered above one display
window trick of tilting the top of the window towards the viewer.
When this is done at a particular angle (and the ground below is not
illuminated by the reflection - another feature of display window
design), then there will be no perception of the window at all. Many
people have knocked there heads against such windows trying to get a
closer look at what was being displayed. Lawyers trumped designers by
begging this was a possible source of litigation for those so injured.
Some of these windows may yet survive in the older parts of your town
where they cater to high-end shoppers. You may note that there are
rails placed in the way to keep the curious from getting to close and
bruising their noggins.

Now, I offered that there is a particular angle. For both the optical
engineer and the rf engineer, it is called the "Brewster Angle." This
is also known as the angle of maximum absorption and minimum
reflection. When light or RF (it doesn't matter which) of vertical
polarization strikes an interface at this angle, all of that energy
passes through the interface with minimum reflection. When you
perform a vertical antenna far field measurement, you may note that
the lobe "sucks in" at the very low radiation angles. This angle that
exhibits poor propagation results is a consequence of the air/earth
boundary that is identical in all respects to an optical interface
between two materials of differing indices. The optical engineer
calls it the index of refraction/reflection (and can be examined
through Snell's Laws); the rf engineer finds the same property in the
ratio between the characteristic Z of air and the characteristic Z of
the earth.

An instance to illustrate the rf scenario. With Air the Z is roughly
400 Ohms, for the Ocean it is roughly 10 Ohms. That ratio, in this
case 40, results in a Brewster Angle of about 1½°. If we were to
consider something more remote, and dryer like the ground in my
neighborhood where the characteristic Z is closer to 100 Ohms (luckily
I can see a vast body of seawater from my window); that ratio is 4
which results in a Brewster Angle of about 15°. Try as I might in
directions other than towards Puget Sound, I will never launch any
significant signals at angles lower than this 15°.

As a closing comment about the Brewster Angle, nearly every Laser uses
this in their output window.

Next in this series: T HE FAILURE OF POOR CONCEPTS IN DISCUSSING THIN
LAYER REFLECTIONS otherwise called by me as the WHEREFORE.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard:

Quite on topic, I commend you!

Yanno, back when I was a young feller, we lived in the sierra nevada
foothills. I remember traveling to my favorite swimming hole on
bicycle. It was over a five miles distant ride, but for the
exuberance of youth, that was no distance what-so-ever.

And, gawd, how hot and ready for a swim we would be when we finally
reached it on our bicycles.

Many times we would take fishing poles with us. Bluegill, trout and
bass could all be caught in the creek there. I never cared for fish
that much myself, but there was always a member of the family which
was more than anxious to take the fish from our hands and make
themselves a meal of it.

Other times we would take along 22 rim fire rifles and plunk around,
shooting targets, bottles and cans. My favorite was a Remington
rifle, single shot bolt action. I had a semi-auto but would go though
ammunition faster than I could make money to replace it. Many of the
other kids parents where not comfortable having their children around
guns, so to their parents, we always kept such secret. Never an
accident, and always behaved in a sane manner with weapons. I that my
father to this day for the excellent instruction he imparted to me in
handling weapons, and the great respect he inspired me to hold for
them. When I was older, I purchased a 9mm german lugar, I still have
it to this day, along with a 45 cal auto, both are favorite guns of
mine. But, the stories of those guns are for another day...

Even did a little gold panning there. The area was a source of vast
amounts of gold during the gold rush. To this day, gold can still be
found in most any stream in that area. And, back then, there were
still a few prospectors around which actually were able to eek out a
living by sluicing the streams there and selling the gold to jewelers.
Later in life I even bought a keen 8 inch dredge and went back. I
ended up finding quite a bit of gold in those creeks and rivers with
that dredge, a buddy and a couple of wet suits. Just loved to drink
beer and float about dredging all day long. This is another fond
memory of mine, but again, a story for another day...

Ahh, those days were some of the most favorite of my youth...

However, I digress here a bit.

So, this brings me to the important point of this post, and the point
I had first set out to develop.

I once (well, maybe more than once) seen a glare on the water of that
swimming hole...

John

"Richard Clark" wrote in message
...

Glare (1):

In the context of matching for both Optical and ordinary RF
applications encountered in the Ham Shack; it is meant to be
described
as the unwanted reflection of energy (or power, or what-have-you).

Glare (2):

In the context of the physiological response to observing unwanted
reflections; it is meant to be described by applications that give
rise to this annoyance. This can sometimes be confused with the
first
meaning of Glare that is suitable close, but can come into conflict
with that meaning.

Glare, and Glare reduction:

When the topic of Glare is expressed in regard to the second usage,
it
is always wavelength specific, and application specific. In fact
this
is true of both meanings, but the commercial marketplace overwhelms
by
example in the second. With that in mind, we have to consider WHO
is
being served by Glare reduction. This is often the naive public who
would otherwise be encumbered by Glare where their attention is
drawn
to it as it masks what is trying to be presented to them.

So, Glare masks the perception by reflections of light from, most
usually, a pane of glass, plexiglass, or acrylic (and so on down the
line) that covers or windows an exhibit. Usually we are speaking of
covered art work, or display cases exhibiting samples or products
(this being the most common form of Glare reduction application).

The quickest and most absolute method of Glare reduction in a
showcase
window on the street looking into a storefront is to simply tilt the
window at the top, toward the viewer. This renders all light source
reflections (typically higher than the head of the viewer) down.
Ten
or twenty degrees of tilt is often enough to give the illusion of
there being no glass at all. Note my usage of "illusion" as Glare
is
all about perception in this second usage. This form of Glare
reduction is wide-band and exhibits very little sensitivity to
wavelength. The same Glare reduction of tilting glass covered
artwork
is also suitable for the same reason. However, I would point out
that
in such cases, the display staff make every effort that the lights
be
spotted on the artwork, otherwise if your face is illuminated, the
artwork suddenly becomes a mirror.

Where both meanings of Glare converge for the same purposes, we find
a
more specific remedy. Specific because it employs tuned interfaces
to
reduce (not eliminate) reflections.

Here is where the convergence demands two different wavelength
specifications, and importantly WHY. As I have offered elsewhere,
there are two types of vision, Photopic and Scotopic (with a third,
Mesopic, between the two which is the process of accommodation of
migrating from one to the other - "acquiring" night vision is a
commonplace description).

Anti-Glare materials that employ thin-film technologies seek to
accommodate the major sources of Glare that fall into these two wide
band regions of 550nM and 510nM. They are also application specific
in that there are two forms of common illumination involved that
compounds this to a four way solution. Those sources of
illumination
are Metal Halide and High Pressure Sodium lamps. There are others,
certainly, but these specie exhibit characteristics that are
extrapolated to similar sources.

Metal Halide lamps exhibit a comb of resonances, as does the High
Pressure Sodium, that makes Glare elimination impossible. However,
it
does not make it impractical as among those major lines of emission,
the optical engineer can select the biggest contributor such as
510nM
for the night vision component of the eye's response. However, this
doesn't make much sense because it also reduces the eye's ability to
perceive what is being illuminated by that wavelength too. Not much
night vision advantage in that, is there? However, when considering
this is placed over artwork commonly, artwork exhibits a Lambertian
distribution of reflected light, not a specular form of reflection.
Hence the specular form exhibited by a pane of glass is reduced and
the Lambertian reflection emerges with a greater contrast (another
benefit of choosing anti-Glare products).

High Pressure Sodium, on the other hand, has a very strong line at
the
610nM wavelength. This, too, would be a natural thin-film
wavelength
selection. In regards to night vision, such a reflection (that is,
without Glare reduction) would be nearly invisible anyway. As such,
its use would be oriented towards those WHO have a light adapted
eye,
that are in a darkened viewing situation.

However, as described, these are very poor solutions to the problem
they attempt to answer. This is because these sources exhibit a
comb
of such wavelengths in their emissions. It follows that one
interference layer may impact one line, but certainly not all (there
being easily a dozen lines of emission for either source in either
light adapted vision). Hence we have the multi-layer methods that
my
quote offered from the marketplace.

It should come as no surprise that anti-Glare products are wholly
useless under common tungsten lighting whose bandwidth is broad and
continuous. There is one exception, and it is commonly found for
computer screen reflection reduction. I must note that such
reduction
has absolutely nothing in common with wavelength interference.

This class of reflection reduction employs a wide band light
reduction. Principally it seeks to reduce all ambient light from
striking the display's surface and then reducing the reflections
even
further. This is a double whammy, where the display suffers it only
once. However, you can control the brightness of the display to
replace that loss, and in this sense you have increased your
signal+noise/noise ratio.

Finally there is one source of reflection elimination that is common
to both the optical engineer and the rf engineer (and apparently
wholly unknown by binary engineers). I offered above one display
window trick of tilting the top of the window towards the viewer.
When this is done at a particular angle (and the ground below is not
illuminated by the reflection - another feature of display window
design), then there will be no perception of the window at all.
Many
people have knocked there heads against such windows trying to get a
closer look at what was being displayed. Lawyers trumped designers
by
begging this was a possible source of litigation for those so
injured.
Some of these windows may yet survive in the older parts of your
town
where they cater to high-end shoppers. You may note that there are
rails placed in the way to keep the curious from getting to close
and
bruising their noggins.

Now, I offered that there is a particular angle. For both the
optical
engineer and the rf engineer, it is called the "Brewster Angle."
This
is also known as the angle of maximum absorption and minimum
reflection. When light or RF (it doesn't matter which) of vertical
polarization strikes an interface at this angle, all of that energy
passes through the interface with minimum reflection. When you
perform a vertical antenna far field measurement, you may note that
the lobe "sucks in" at the very low radiation angles. This angle
that
exhibits poor propagation results is a consequence of the air/earth
boundary that is identical in all respects to an optical interface
between two materials of differing indices. The optical engineer
calls it the index of refraction/reflection (and can be examined
through Snell's Laws); the rf engineer finds the same property in
the
ratio between the characteristic Z of air and the characteristic Z
of
the earth.

An instance to illustrate the rf scenario. With Air the Z is
roughly
400 Ohms, for the Ocean it is roughly 10 Ohms. That ratio, in this
case 40, results in a Brewster Angle of about 1½°. If we were to
consider something more remote, and dryer like the ground in my
neighborhood where the characteristic Z is closer to 100 Ohms
(luckily
I can see a vast body of seawater from my window); that ratio is 4
which results in a Brewster Angle of about 15°. Try as I might in
directions other than towards Puget Sound, I will never launch any
significant signals at angles lower than this 15°.

As a closing comment about the Brewster Angle, nearly every Laser
uses
this in their output window.

Next in this series: T HE FAILURE OF POOR CONCEPTS IN DISCUSSING
THIN
LAYER REFLECTIONS otherwise called by me as the WHEREFORE.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

"Richard Clark" wrote (among much else):
Try as I might in directions other than towards Puget Sound,
I will never launch any significant signals at angles lower
than this 15°.
_________________

Maybe you won't, but that doesn't mean it is impossible. A well-designed,
well-implemented vertical can do that. If it couldn't, MW broadcast
stations wouldn't have much of a groundwave.

RF

R.F.:

Reminds me of the guy who I once met who thought he was Napoleon; to
tell you the truth, he damn near had me convinced.

Turned out he wasn't, actually, I was quite disappointed! grin

Still, he could, somewhere along the line, have a direct relationship
to the Napoleon bloodline!

Yep, quite a shame, I think he knew Shakespeare too--and not just his
works, the actual man!!! innocent-look

John

"Richard Fry" wrote in message
...
"Richard Clark" wrote (among much else):
Try as I might in directions other than towards Puget Sound,
I will never launch any significant signals at angles lower
than this 15°.
_________________

Maybe you won't, but that doesn't mean it is impossible. A
well-designed, well-implemented vertical can do that. If it
couldn't, MW broadcast stations wouldn't have much of a groundwave.

RF

Richard Fry wrote:
"Richard Clark" wrote (among much else):

Try as I might in directions other than towards Puget Sound,
I will never launch any significant signals at angles lower
than this 15°.

_________________

Maybe you won't, but that doesn't mean it is impossible. A
well-designed, well-implemented vertical can do that. If it couldn't,
MW broadcast stations wouldn't have much of a groundwave.

RF

I'm sure Richard (Clark) is talking about sky wave. You're talking about
surface wave. Indeed, a field is "launched" at all angles. But the
portion at low angles (the surface wave) attenuates with distance, and
the attenuation increases with frequency. At HF and above it's good for
only a few miles, and all that's left beyond that is the sky wave, at
higher angles. It is possible to get very low angle sky wave, but it
requires vertically polarized waves and a very good conductor like salt
water for several wavelengths from the antenna in the direction of
propagation; favorably sloping terrain; or an extremely high
horizontally polarized antenna.

As I'm sure you know, AM broadcast antennas intentionally radiate very
little sky wave, and that's what amateurs need for communication beyond
a few miles. Some care must be used in comparing MW broadcasting
requirements and characteristics with amateur HF communications.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

"Roy Lewallen" wrote:
As I'm sure you know, AM broadcast antennas intentionally radiate
very little sky wave, and that's what amateurs need for communication
beyond a few miles. Some care must be used in comparing MW
broadcasting requirements and characteristics with amateur
HF communications.
__________________

AM broadcast station verticals have very significant energy at elevation
angles that can be propagated by skywaves. As I'm sure you know, Class A AM
broadcast stations have an extended geographic service area served
exclusively by their nighttime skywave--many times more area than is served
by their surface wave, in fact.

Richard Clark's statement did not limit his conclusion to amateur HF
communications.

RF

Richard Fry wrote:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote:

As I'm sure you know, AM broadcast antennas intentionally radiate
very little sky wave, and that's what amateurs need for communication
beyond a few miles. Some care must be used in comparing MW
broadcasting requirements and characteristics with amateur
HF communications.

__________________

AM broadcast station verticals have very significant energy at elevation
angles that can be propagated by skywaves. As I'm sure you know, Class
A AM broadcast stations have an extended geographic service area served
exclusively by their nighttime skywave--many times more area than is
served by their surface wave, in fact.

Richard Clark's statement did not limit his conclusion to amateur HF
communications.

RF

I'm sorry, I stand corrected. Extended coverage AM stations do indeed
produce significant sky wave as you've pointed out. I was thinking only
of suppression of high angle sky wave radiation to avoid fading.

And you're also correct about Richard Clark's statement. Perhaps he is
indeed attempting to do some MF broadcasting to his local area -- I just
assumed he wasn't.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

"Roy Lewallen" wrote
And you're also correct about Richard Clark's statement. Perhaps he is
indeed attempting to do some MF broadcasting to his local
area -- I just assumed he wasn't.
___________________

I did, too. But antennas carefully developed and documented for good MF
broadcast performance also are useful for 160 meter ham applications.

And as far as significant radiation at elevation angles below 15 degrees,
Richard Clark might have allowed for systems operating above 30 MHz, which
include several ham bands, I believe. Use of these bands often is
line-of-sight between terrestrial endpoints, and would not be very
successful if all antennas had low relative fields near the horizon--as
implied by Richard Clark's post. FM and TV broadcasting and public service
radio (police/fire etc) use such low-angle radiation successfully, and so do
ham radio operators.

RF

Richard Clark wrote:

Glare (1):

In the context of matching for both Optical and ordinary RF
applications encountered in the Ham Shack; it is meant to be described
as the unwanted reflection of energy (or power, or what-have-you).

The IEEE Dictionary does not have that as a definition for "glare".
I made a mistake in calling my example a "non-glare glass" example
and I appologize for that poor choice of words. It was a semantic
mistake, not a conceptual mistake.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Richard Clark wrote:
"As a closing comment about the Brewster Angle, nearly every laser uses
this in their output window."

A plane wave strikes the earth and its reflection leaves at an angle
which equals the angle of incidence.

The strength of reflected wave to incident wave is a vector ratio called
the reflection coefficient.

Strength of the fields just above the earth is the vector sum of the
incident and reflected waves, taking into account both time phase and
space orientation.

The reflection coefficient`s value depends on the characteristics of the
reflecting surface. If the earth were a perfect reflector, the reflected
wave would be as strong as the incident wave and the value of the
reflectopn coefficient would be 1.

With a perfect reflector, the horizontal components of the electric
incident and reflected fields exactly cancel (Terman`s words) at the
reflecting surface. On the contrary, the vertical components of the
electric fields of the incident and reflected waves do not cancel, but
add together at small reflection angles.

For imperfect earth, magnitude of the reflection coefficient is less
than 1, and the angle of the reflected wave will be slightly shifted.

The incidence angle has a complicated effect on vertically polarized
waves. At grazing incidence, the reflection coefficient is 1 on an angle
of 180-degrees. The reflected wave is as strong as the incident wave,
but its phase is reversed by the reflection. However, with vertical
incidence, the phase shift is very small and the reflection coefficient
is less than 1 with real earth.

Between the extremes of grazing incidence and vertical incidence,
magnitude of the reflection coefficient goes through a minimum at a
small angle of incidence and reflection. It depends on the
characteristics of the reflector (soil). This puts a small reduction of
radiation at a low vertical angle called the Brewster angle.

At the Brewster angle, the magnitude of the reflection coefficient for
vertically polarized waves will be much less than 1 and so tends to
reduce radiation at some low vertical angle, but not at zero degrees..

My 19th edition of the ARRL Antenna Book calls this minimum in the
vertical radiation pattern, the "Pseudo-Brewster Angle" (PBA) because
its effect was noticed in the reflection (glare) of sunlight from water
surfaces when the sun was low. It was named for Sir David Brewster, a
Scottish Physicist (1781-1868). PBA is described on page 3-6.

Best regards, Richard Harrison, KB5WZI