Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • US Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method For Low Profile Antennas

    Uploaded by

    Alexander J Rokowetz
    34 views20 pages
    United States Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method for Low-Profile Antennas

    Original Title

    US Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method for Low Profile Antennas

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    United States Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method for Low-Profile Antennas

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    34 views20 pages

    US Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method For Low Profile Antennas

    Uploaded by

    Alexander J Rokowetz
    United States Patent 4,825,224 - Broadband Impedance Matching System and Method for Low-Profile Antennas

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 20
    United States Patent 11 (1) Patent Number: 4,825,224 Grose et al. [45] Date of Patent: Apr. 25, 1989 [54] BROAD BAND IMPEDANCE MATCHING 2998516. 1961 Lehan eta. as0/s SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR Siessi0 5/965 Rawk Sarre PPROFILE ANTEN 3212093 10/1968. Brocekaaa Save oe ed 3,215,937 11/1965 Tanner 325/28 [75] Inventors: Brian L. Grose; Orval N. Skousen, 3,346,864 10/1967 343/719 both of Provo, Utah 3,400,402 9/1968 343/723, ' ; : Bassas? 571309 33/719 (73) Assignee: Ryring Research Tastitute, Ine, S5mes Sgr Holechah tl saat Provo, Uish S504798 A871 Leyden? 79 [21] Appl. No.: 902,875 (List continued on next page.) [22] Filed: Sep. 2, 1986 FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS euros _ HOI 1/30 676331 12/1963. Cenada [2] US.c. 343 /aea, 383/02 ort [58] Field of Search ... 343/820, 821, 822, 859, ees “343/865, 793, 719 Antenna Engineering Handbook, Second Edition, ed- reronces Ci ited by Richard C. Johnson and Henry Sasi, pp. 11-18 (se a on (1961-1984). US. PATENT DOCUMENTS ‘714,246 11/1902 Shoemaker (List continued on next page.) ‘760,463 5/1904 Marconi - Primary Examiner—William L. Sikes BAVA 171806 DeForest ‘Assistant Examiner Robert E, Wise Reale auieeee ‘Attorney, Agent or Frm--Workman, Nydegger & 1,123,119 12/1914 De Forest Jensen zn ‘3/1917 Rogen eta 1,303,729 5/1919 Rogers 7] AeSTEAcE 13t8730 $/1919| Roger ‘A broad band impedance matching system and method W3ishea 971919: Rogers for use with low-profile antennas. The system com- Ta1eiss 971919 Roses « prises an antenna formed by a pair of radiating clemments 1,322,622 11/1919 Rogers et al. positioned on or in proximity to the earth’s surface. The 1,349,103 8/1920 Rogers « antenna has an effective electrical length equal to one Vaaglo4 /s20 2 a4 1500 Rogen half wavelength ina given medium at the lowest fre~ eae et ee 1 & Phase 1 8 ‘ & -180 -225 14 7 © 8 6 © 2 2 2 3 Frequency (MHz) FIG. 8B US. Patent Magnitude ( Ohms ) (degrees ) Phase 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 180 13s 8 2 & ° 1 & & 1 8 8 1 & ' 8 -228 Apr. 25, 1989 Sheet 5 of 7 4,825,224 1 4 7 © B&B 6 9 2 2 2 3 Frequency (MH, ) FIG. 9A ] Ul Wn — | 1 4 7 0 8B 6 @ 2 2 2 3 Frequency (MH;) FIG. 98 US. Patent — Apr. 25, 1989 ( Ohms ) Magnitude (degrees ) Phase 140 120 100 20 60 40 20 -90 -138 -180 -225 Sheet 6 of 7 4,825,224 31 Frequency (MHz) FIG. 108 7 0 8 6 9 22 2 26 Frequency (MHz) FIG. 10A | 1 | | | | | T 1 | | \ 7 1 8 6 1 2 2 2 3 US. Patent — Apr. 25, 1989 Sheet 7 of 7 4,825,224 200 180 7 (Ohms ) 80 Magnitude » HY [ft toy Tt 20 Frequency (MHz) FIG. IA 225 180 135 8 & [> (degrees ) Frequency (MHz) FIG. 1B 4,825,224 1 BROAD BAND IMPEDANCE MATCHING SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOW-PROFILE ANTENNAS BACKGROUND 1. Field of the Invention This invention relates to low-profile antenna systems and to impedance matching systems and methods for use with low-profile antenna systems. More particu- larly, this invention relates to novel apparatus and meth- ods for providing a broad band impedance match be- tween a low-profile antenna and a transmission line such. that the antenna system may be efficiently operated cover a broad range of electromagnetic signal frequen- cies. 2. The Prior Art Various types of communication systems which are ‘based upon the propagation of electromagnetic signals hhave been known and used for many years. For exam- ple, commercial radio and television stations broadcast many hours of programming each day by transmitting appropriate electromagnetic signals through the atmo- sphere which are then received by individual radio and/or television receivers located within such station's area of broadcast. Similarly, by both transmitting and receiving suitable electromagnetic signals, government agencies, private businesses, and individuals are able to readily communicate over long distances, thereby trans- mitting and receiving data and/or instructions which may be vital to out nation's economy and/or security. Generally, communication systems such as those described above employ large antennas which extend high above the earth's surface in order to effectively transmit and/or receive the desired electromagnetic signals. Such antennas are commonly referred to as “aerial” antennas. Typical serial antennas may, for ex- ample, be secured several hundred feet above the earth's surface to the top of a high tower or building; and such antennas are also commonly supported by ‘numerous guy wires which provide the antenna with additional structural stability. Its also quite common to install aerial antennas, together with their supporting towers and guy wires, on the slopes of relatively high mountains. By placing the antennas upon such towers and/or mountains, the range and effectiveness of the antennas can be significantly increased. ‘Although conventional aerial antennas are generally ‘uite effective and may be constructed so as to operate very efficiently in both transmitting and receiving the desired electromagnetic signals, such antennas suffer from a number of significant disadvantages. First, aerial antennas are considered “soft” for secu- rity purposes. “Hardness” and “softness” are military terms used to denote a system's vulnerability to destruc- tion; and the “harder” a system is, the less vulnerable to destruction such system is. The “hardness” of a commu nication system is generally measured by such criteria as its ability to withstand substantial shock, as in the case of a powerful explosion occurring very near to the system, and the ability of the system to survive high energy electromagnetic pulse radiation which may be produced by a nuclear blast. ‘Unfortunately, even though @ powerful explosion ‘may be centered some distance away from the above- described aerial antennas, the resulting shock waves will likely damage or destroy such antennas, thereby rendering the associated communication systems either totally or partially inoperative. Furthermore, aerial 15 2s 38 0 4s © 6 2 antennas which transmit or receive high frequency electromagnetic signals are very susceptible to the ad- verse effects of the above-mentioned electromagnetic pulse radiation. ‘Some attempts have been made to increase the “hard- ness” of communication systems which use the above- described aerial antennas by constructing appropriate back-up antenna systems. However, both economic and environmental considerations make it very difficult to either justify or construct the number of back-up an- tenna systems which would be required in order t0 achieve an acceptable level of “hardness.” Therefore, despite the general effectiveness of the conventional aerial antennas, the use of such antennas in communica- tion systems which are vital to our national security remains highly undesirable. ‘Another significant drawback of prior art aerial an- tennas is that they generally are quite expensive, cum- bersome, and time consuming to construct. Construc- tion of an aerial antenna and its associated support struc- ture may, for example, require several thousand dollars in materials alone. In addition, a number of laborers are usually required in order to complete construction, and conventional construction machinery and equipment are typically employed. Moreover, many man-hours of labor are generally required before the antenna system is operational. In certain applications, such a, for example, when an antenna system will be used by military personnel, there is simply not enough time to construct a conventional aerial antenna. This is particularly true if the antenna is, tobe used by combat troops. In such cases, the required construction materials and equipment may also be un available, and the man-power requirements may like- wise be prohibitive. In military applications, there are also other impor- tant reasons for not using conventional aerial antennas. First, aerial antennas are generally immobile and cannot be easily moved from one location to another. Also, aerial antennas are relatively easy to detect and quite difficult to camouflage. It will be appreciated that both of these factors render conventional aerial antennas unsuitable for many military applications. ‘As a result of the above-outlined drawbacks of con- ventional aerial antennas, a number of attempts have bbeen made by those skilled in the art to provide antenna systems which are easily camouflaged, economic to construct, simple to deploy, and resistant to destruction. One type of antenna system which has been investigated and which seems to have grest potential may generally be referred to as a “low-profile” antenna system, in that the system is deployed at, or near (i.,, either above or below) the earth’s surface. ‘A low-profile antenna system does not, of course, require the expensive support structure of conventional aerial antennas. As a result, a low-profile antenna sys- tem is generally much less expensive to construct than conventional aerial antenna systems. In addition, since a low-profile antenna is positioned on or near the earth’s surface, and may, therefore, require litle or no support- ing structure, the man-power requirements for con- struction are significantly reduced, and the need for machinery and equipment may be virtually eliminated. Further, since a low-profile antenna system is located on or near the earth’s surface, it is much easier to cam- ouflage and is inherently less susceptible to destruction, 4,825,224 3 Despite the promising possibilities of ow-profle an- tenna systems, however, the low-profile antenna sys- tems of the prior art have generally been unable tO provide acceptable transmission and reception charac {Snotice. In particular, the prior art low-profile antenna systems have generally been found to be inefficient transmission and reception, except over a relatively narrow band of electromagnetic signal frequencies. ‘While operation of an antenna at a single signal fre- quency, of over a relatively narrow range of frequen Gies, may be acceptable for some applications, broad band operation is most desirable, For example, in mili- tary applications, mestages are generally transmitted at ‘several different signal frequencies, and the signal fre- quency is often changed in some manner during. the transmission. In this way, it becomes much more

    You might also like