The metallic diffraction grating problem has been solved for P-polarization using a conformal mapping and the surface impedance boundary condition. The method is used to calculate the electromagnetic fields diffracted by a grating having a cycloidal groove shape. The numerical results are compared with those obtained using the direct differential formalism. For low conductivities the coincidence between both results is only qualitative, whereas there exists a zone for greater conductivities where the differences are smaller than 0·;005. For even greater conductivities the approximated boundary condition employed holds more exactly, but the comparison is not possible because the direct differential method involves numerical problems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Depine et al. (1982) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: