Rectangular electromagnetic waveguide

Take a straight hollow rectangular electromagnetic waveguide with vacuum interior $0<x<a$, $0<y<b$ and axis $z$, where $a>b>0$. Its four walls are ideal perfect conductors. The time-dependent Maxwell equations require zero tangential electric field and zero normal oscillating magnetic field at these walls. Real metal has finite electrical conductivity, so real guides lose electromagnetic energy by Joule heating; the perfect-wall model isolates confinement and wave dispersion from that loss.

The simplest propagating transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$. “Transverse electric” means $E_z=0$, not that the magnetic field is also wholly transverse. With real peak scale $E_0$, its complex amplitudes, including the common axial factor, can be writtenThe physical fields are the real parts after multiplication by $e^{-i\omega t}$. In particular, $E_y$ is zero at $x=0,a$, maximal at $x=a/2$, and independent of $y$. At $y=0,b$ it is normal to the metal, so it need not vanish there. The ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ electric field crosses the narrow gap, while its strength varies across the broad dimension.

For an original example choose $a=30\mathrm{mm}$, $b=12\mathrm{mm}$ and $f=1.25f_c$, where $f_c=c/(2a)$. With $c=299792458m/s$, this givesHere ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ is vacuum wavelength and ${\lambda }_g=2\pi /\beta$ is guided wavelength. The next cutoff is ${\mathrm{TE}}_{20}$ at $2f_c$; ${\mathrm{TE}}_{01}$ starts at $(a/b)f_c=2.5f_c$. Thus only ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ can propagate at the chosen frequency, although a source or discontinuity can additionally excite local evanescent waves. These are calculated values, not specifications or measurements of a commercial guide.

In a hollow rectangular electromagnetic waveguide with perfect conductor walls and axis $z$, a transverse magnetic polarization has $B_z=0$ and a nonzero longitudinal electric field $E_z$. The wall boundary conditions impose $E_z=0$ around the transverse rectangle. Separation of variables therefore gives $E_z=E_0\sin (n\pi x/a)\sin (m\pi y/b)e^{i(k_{z}z-\omega t)}$, with $n,m\ge 1$. Setting either index to zero makes the entire field vanish. Thus there is no ${\mathrm{TM}}_{n0}$ or ${\mathrm{TM}}_{0m}$ branch. The transverse eigenvalue is $k_{\perp }^2=(n\pi /a{)}^2+(m\pi /b{)}^2$, with dispersion relation ${\omega }^2/c^2=k_z^2+k_{\perp }^2$. This exclusion is specific to this geometry and these boundary conditions.

The waveguide cutoff frequency separates oscillatory axial propagation from exponential decay for a particular normal mode. For the vacuum-filled rectangular electromagnetic waveguide, the dispersion relation isFor a transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide, $m,n$ are nonnegative integers but not both zero. For a mode with $B_z=0$ and nonzero $E_z$, both indices must be positive. The lowest cutoff for $a>b$ is consequently ${\omega }_{10}=\pi c/a$, or ordinary frequency $f_c=c/(2a)$.

A square cross-section instead gives equal ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ and ${\mathrm{TE}}_{01}$ cutoffs. The absence of a transverse electromagnetic mode is specific to this hollow pipe, rather than all electromagnetic waveguides.^[ref]

For $\omega >{\omega }_{mn}$, choose real $\beta >0$ for propagation toward $+z$. For $0<\omega <{\omega }_{mn}$, a field decaying into a semi-infinite guide hasA finite section can contain both growing and decaying axial solutions set by its two ends; the single decaying solution is not a complete finite-section transmission calculation. At exact cutoff $\beta =0$, the two axial solutions become a constant and a linear function of $z$: there is no finite axial wavelength for a traveling sinusoid.

In the chosen $a=30\mathrm{mm}$ guide at $f=0.8f_c=3.99723277\mathrm{GHz}$, the ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ branch has $\alpha =20\pi {\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$. Its amplitude decay length is $1/\alpha \simeq 15.9155\mathrm{mm}$; after $50\mathrm{mm}$, its normalized wave amplitude is $e^{-\pi }\simeq 0.0432139$. This is geometric evanescence even with ideal walls, not Joule heating. A single decaying branch has zero cycle-averaged axial Poynting vector: substituting $\beta =i\alpha$ makes $B_x$ a quarter-cycle out of phase with $E_y$. Coupling across a finite section requires the complete boundary-value solution.

For a propagating branch of an ideal vacuum-filled rectangular electromagnetic waveguide, the phase velocity tracks constant wave phase along the axis, whereas the group velocity describes a sufficiently narrow, weakly distorted wave packet. Using ${\omega }^2=c^2{\beta }^2+{\omega }_c^2$ givesThus $v_{\mathrm{ph}}>c$, $0<v_g<c$, and $v_{\mathrm{ph}}{v}_g=c^2$. Differentiating the dispersion relation proves the second formula; dividing it by ${\beta }^2$ proves the first. This is the same mathematical structure as Klein-Gordon packet velocities. In the stipulated $f=1.25f_c$ example,Over $0.30\mathrm{m}$, the corresponding narrow-envelope delay is $(0.50\mathrm{m})/c$, approximately $1.668\mathrm{ns}$. Timing a carrier wave crest would give $0.6004\mathrm{ns}$; it does not time the arrival of a newly introduced message.

There is an independent energy check. For the forward ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ fields, the average axial Poynting vector is $⟨S_z⟩=\beta |E_y{|}^2/(2{\mu }_0\omega )$. Integrating across the guide gives average power $P$ and average electromagnetic energy per unit length $U^{\prime }$:The transverse sine and cosine squared each integrate to $a/2$; ${\beta }^2+(\pi /a{)}^2={\omega }^2/c^2$ then makes the integrated electric and magnetic contributions to $U^{\prime }$ equal. The axial energy transport therefore agrees with the group velocity in this ideal model.

As $\omega \downarrow {\omega }_c$, $v_g\to 0$ and $v_{\mathrm{ph}}\to \infty$; exactly at cutoff $\omega /\beta$ is undefined. Strong wave dispersion close to cutoff also limits the narrow-packet approximation. Neither a large phase velocity nor a pulse peak establishes superluminal information velocity; front velocity asks a separate causal question. In a uniform filling with constant positive permittivity $\epsilon$ and magnetic permeability $\mu$, replace $c$ by $u=1/\sqrt{\epsilon \mu }$, giving $v_{\mathrm{ph}}{v}_g=u^2$. Frequency-dependent material response or significant loss requires differentiating the actual dispersion relation, so this product is not universal.

A transverse electric mode of a rectangular waveguide has $E_z=0$ while its axial magnetic field is generally nonzero. For time dependence $e^{-i\omega t}$ and axial dependence $e^{i\beta z}$, set $\Delta =(\omega /c{)}^2-{\beta }^2$. The Maxwell equations reconstruct the transverse components from $B_z$:The axial complex amplitude satisfies a transverse Helmholtz equation, $({\partial }_x^2+{\partial }_y^2+\Delta )B_z=0$. Zero tangential electric field at each perfect conductor wall becomes a Neumann boundary condition on $B_z$. Separation of variables givesThe index $m$ counts half-periods across $a$, and $n$ across $b$. Either index can vanish, allowing ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$; both cannot vanish. Indeed a spatially constant axial oscillating magnetic field would give nonzero changing magnetic flux through the cross-section, whereas the line integral of tangential electric field around its metal boundary is zero. The integral form of Faraday's law excludes this ${\mathrm{TE}}_{00}$ candidate. Dividing the reconstruction formulas by $\Delta =0$ would be invalid and cannot produce the separate transverse electromagnetic mode.

For $m=1,n=0$, choose $B_{\ast }=-i(\pi /a)E_0/\omega$. The formulas recover exactly the $E_y$, $B_x$ and $B_z$ in rectangular electromagnetic waveguide. In particular, the transverse magnetic field accompanies $B_z$ and ensures zero divergence; an oscillating longitudinal magnetic field on its own is not the guided solution.

Below the lowest waveguide cutoff frequency, the axial wave number of the ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$ mode is $i\kappa$, with $\kappa >0$. For a real peak scale $E_0$ and time convention $e^{-i\omega t}$, $E_y=E_0\sin (\pi x/a)e^{-\kappa z}$, $B_x=-i\kappa E_y/\omega$ and $B_z=-i{E}_0(\pi /a)\cos (\pi x/a)e^{-\kappa z}/\omega$. The electric field and magnetic field are in quadrature. A single decaying mode in a lossless semi-infinite guide consequently has zero time-averaged Poynting vector, although its instantaneous field stores energy.

The guided wavelength is the distance for a $2\pi$ change of axial wave phase in a propagating normal mode. For the vacuum-filled rectangular electromagnetic waveguide,for ${\mathrm{TE}}_{10}$, with ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ and $f>f_c$. It exceeds the vacuum wavelength at the same frequency. This longer axial spacing is consistent with $v_{\mathrm{ph}}>c$: multiplying ${\lambda }_g$ by $f$ gives the phase velocity, not the group velocity.

Two oppositely traveling fields at the same frequency form a standing wave. For a perfect electric short at $z=0$, the total electric field is proportional to $\sin (\beta z)\sin (\pi x/a)$, so successive axial electric nodes are separated byThus neighboring minima in a slotted line scan give half a guided wavelength. In the original $a=30\mathrm{mm}$, $f=1.25f_c$ example, $d=40\mathrm{mm}$ implies ${\lambda }_g=80\mathrm{mm}$, not $40\mathrm{mm}$. Combined with the chosen $f$, the inferred broad dimension is $a={\lambda }_0/[2\sqrt{1-({\lambda }_0/{\lambda }_g{)}^2}]=30\mathrm{mm}$. Below cutoff, $\beta$ is imaginary and $2\pi /\beta$ is not a physical periodic spacing.

MIT's documented slotted-line waveguide measurement shorts one end of a rectangular electromagnetic waveguide and excites it through a probe coupled by capacitance. A second such probe moves through a longitudinal slot, aligned with the wall electric current to reduce disturbance. Its output locates axial standing wave nulls. The book's standing-wave setup chooses a frequency above the first waveguide cutoff frequency and below higher-mode cutoffs. Lowering it below the first cutoff instead reveals spatial decay away from the source. The text supplies apparatus and an observable comparison, rather than a table of measured null positions.^[ref]

The inference can be checked without assuming that detector output is proportional to electric field amplitude. At fixed measured frequency, record several minima at coordinates $z_0,\dots ,z_N$; then estimate ${\lambda }_g=2(z_N-z_0)/N$ when the minima are consecutive. This uses positions alone. Compare the result with the guided wavelength prediction using independently measured $a$ and $f$. The $40\mathrm{mm}$ spacing above is a synthetic example, not a reading from the MIT apparatus.

Additional proposed controls are to keep probe insertion fixed, repeat the scan in both directions, recheck source frequency, and compare shallow probe settings for shifts in the minima. These test probe loading, mechanical backlash and drift. A deliberately reflecting termination supplies the standing wave; varying its position should translate the pattern without changing adjacent-null spacing in a uniform single-mode region. Source-adjacent evanescent waves, unintended reflections, additional propagating normal modes, detector noise and finite positional resolution can spoil that inference. A disappearing remote signal alone does not distinguish below-cutoff decay from loss or poor excitation, and a scan at one frequency does not measure a pulse's group velocity.