VGTU Phase II Report (2017): Interference Mechanism Confirmed — Reflection-Mode and Four-Resonator Array Testing

VGTU Phase II Report (2017): Interference Mechanism, Reflection-Mode Testing, and Four-Resonator Arrays

Institution: VGTU — Laboratory of Photovoltaic Technology, Department of Physics | Customer: UAB AIRESLITA | Year: 2017
Investigators: Dainius Jasaitis (Head of Laboratory), Prof. Artūras Jukna (Head of Physics Dept.)

Context

Direct continuation of the VGTU Phase I study (2016), which measured a 27% average field reduction in optical transmission mode with individual R-Cs. Phase II explained the mechanism behind that result and extended testing to optical reflection mode and to 2D arrays of four R-Cs.

The Interference Mechanism

Phase II's central finding: the resonator-converter (R-C) does not block or absorb the incident electromagnetic wave. Some of the incident wave's energy reflects off the R-C surface, and that reflected wave interferes with the incident wave. Because both waves originate from the same source, they are coherent — in a fixed phase relationship — and their interference produces a new electromagnetic wave, localized near the R-C, with a frequency and phase different from either the incident or reflected wave. This is wave interference and field reorganization, not shielding.

Methods

Individual R-Cs (Aires Black Crystal, Aires Shield, Aires Defender — the same types from Phase I) were tested in both optical transmission and optical reflection modes. Separately, groups of four R-Cs of the same type, mounted on a panel transparent to 0–8 GHz radiation, were tested in the same two modes. Equipment: Signal Hound Spectrum Analyzer (100 Hz–8 GHz) with FFT analysis. Measurements taken at 2λ–10λ receiver distance.

Key Findings

Individual resonator, optical reflection mode: Electric field amplitude in the 0.9–2.5 GHz band decreased by an average of 20% due to interference between incident and reflected waves. Maximum damping efficiency when the R-C is positioned within 3λ of the receiver — the configuration that matches how the device is actually worn or placed, close to the source.

Individual resonator, optical transmission mode: Interaction equivalent to a metal plate screening the incident wave's electric component (consistent with the Phase I result).

Four-resonator arrays, optical transmission mode: The two tested groups (four Aires Black Crystal R-Cs; four Aires Shield R-Cs) showed average field-amplitude reductions of 25% and 22% respectively — comparable in magnitude to the single-resonator results, confirming the effect is reproducible across group configurations.

Threshold power (Emin): Minimum activation power ≥ 2 W at 0.9 GHz. At higher frequencies, Emin was found proportional to photon energy (hν) and the square of electric field amplitude (E²) — a physically grounded model of the threshold activation mechanism, established here for the first time.

Group optical transmission: Arrays showed optical transmission not exceeding 8%, confirming groups reflect the majority of interacting energy.

Significance

The interference mechanism and the Emin ∝ ƒ(hν, E²) relationship established here informed the MEMS design work in the C-series R&D reports (C16S, C28S, C32S) and are referenced in the Springer ICICT theoretical modeling papers. Phase III (2018) went on to test how array geometry itself — co-planar vs. rotationally offset, with or without a central resonator — changes efficiency, finding differences of roughly 21–37% between configurations.

VGTU Three-Phase Program

Phase I (2016) — Individual R-C baseline, transmission mode, 27% reduction | Phase II (2017) — Interference mechanism, reflection-mode testing (20%), four-resonator arrays (22–25%) | Phase III (2018) — 2D and 3D multi-group geometry effects | Physics and Engineering Cluster →