Comparison of diffraction with numerical and physical experiments

Diffraction equations are used widely for propagation analysis and they offer a rigorous approach for idealized free space situations. But there is an ongoing need for accurate and fast propagation analysis for real-world problems such as around just one or perhaps two buildings in a cluttered scenario. The diffraction calculations can offer a guideline only because of the clutter. Superimposing a statistical approach onto the diffraction is a way forward, and so it is of interest to compare the analytical results with numerical, and physical experiments to test the guideline. The accuracy of a numerical approach for diffraction depends on the method of field computation (e.g., the MoM with primary sources cannot be expected to be accurate). Physical measurements provide the ultimate test of accuracy but they are complex and expensive for most real-world scenarios. Here we compare analytic, numerical and physical experiment results from laboratory measurements. These results give a feel for the accuracy of a commercial solver for diffraction and indicate that a simple empirical model may be just as good as a rigorous diffraction solution for the mean field.