Antenna Pattern Design Based On Minimax Algorithm: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90009, United States

Antenna Pattern Design Based on
Minimax Algorithm
H. K. Hwang 1 and Robert Grados 2

The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90009, United States
This paper is the first of two describing the antenna pattern design using the minimax
algorithm. By using the minimax signal processing algorithm to minimize the maximum
absolute value of the weighted cost function, we can emphasize the difference between the
ideal and realizable functions in some critical regions. This paper presents circular antenna
pattern designs using a 7-by-7 rectangular phased-array antenna, demonstrates an example
of using the minimax algorithm to approximate the exponential function by polynomials,
and discusses the effect of the weighting factor in the cost function to the antenna pattern
and other key algorithm parameters and corresponding design tradeoffs.
I. Introduction
T O gain an understanding of the minimax algorithm as well as its application to phased-array antennas, we
started an effort to develop a minimax-based computer program to synthesize array antenna beam patterns. This
paper is the first of two papers on this subject. This paper describes the minimax algorithm and its applications on
phased-array antenna pattern design. It describes the synthesis of boresight and off-boresight circular beams using
the unconstrained (amplitude and phase) minimax algorithm.
The paper starts with a brief description of the minimax algorithm in Section II. Section III presents the
application of the minimax algorithm to digital filter design. Section IV presents its application to phased-array
antenna beam pattern design, with one-dimensional and two-dimensional antenna array examples respectively.
Representative antenna patterns from computer simulations are shown in Sections III and IV to demonstrate
algorithm parameters and performance trade-offs. Finally, Section V draws conclusions from this study and section
VI addresses suggested future work.
The minimax algorithm has been around for several decades and used in various engineering applications,
including digital filter design and antenna pattern design. It is now used for pattern design for phased-array antennas
as well.
II. Minimax Algorithm

The minimax algorithm [1] approximates a known (desired) function f 1 (y) by using another function f 2 (x; y),
where vector x = [x 1 , x 2 , ... x K ]H (the superscript H represents the complex conjugate transpose, or Hermitian,
matrix) represents the parameters to be estimated in f 2 (x; y) such that the maximum absolute value of the difference
between f 1 (y) and f 2 (x; y) is minimized. If this algorithm is used in filter design, x is the filter coefficient vector. If,
however, this algorithm is used in array antenna pattern design, x is the array weighting vector.
The minimax algorithm starts with an arbitrary initial state x 0 and iteratively minimizes the maximum absolute
value of the cost function f(y) = f 2 (x; y) – f 1 (y). The algorithm searches for y max , where the cost function has its
maximum absolute value. If f 2 (x; y max ) > f 1 (y max ), the parameter vector x is adjusted according to the following
equation:
x = x – α ∇xf (2.1)
If f 2 (x; y max ) < f 1 (y max ), the parameter vector is adjusted by the following equation:
1
Consultant, Communication Systems Engineering Department, The Aerospace Corporation, P.O. Box 92957, Los
Angeles, CA 90009, M1-937
2
Advanced Degree Fellow, Communication Systems Engineering Department, The Aerospace Corporation, P.O.
Box 92957, Los Angeles, CA 90009, M1-937
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
092407
x = x + α ∇xf (2.2)
T
 ∂f ∂f ∂f 
where α is the step size, and ∇ x f =  , ,..,  is the gradient vector of the cost function. This
 ∂x 1 ∂x 2 ∂x K 
parameter vector updating process continues until the change in parameter vector is sufficiently small.
The minimax algorithm is summarized as follows:
1. Choose any arbitrary state x 0 and compute the cost function f(y) = f 2 (x; y) – f 1 (y) over the predefined
sample points y 1 , y 2 , . . , y N . In general N is larger than K, where K is the dimension of vector x.
2. Find sample point y max , where the absolute value of f(y) is maximum.
3. Compute the gradient vector ∇ x f at y = y max .
4. Replace the parameter vector by its new value x new = x old – α ∇ x f if f(y max ) > 0 and x new = x old +
α ∇ x f otherwise, where α is the step size.
5. Go to step 1 and repeat the process until ||x new – x old || < ε.
Consider a simple case of approximating the exponential function f 1 (y) = ey over the interval [–1, 1] by
n
polynomial function f 2 (x; y) = ∑x
k =0
k y k , where the parameter vector x = [x 0 , x 1 , . . , x n ]T. The sample point goes
from y = –1 to y = 1, with an increment of 0.1.
n
The cost function in this case is f(y) = ∑x
k =0
k y k – ey. The gradient vector of the cost function is
T
 ∂f ∂f 
∇xf = 
∂f
  =1 y  y
n
[ ]T
(2.3)
 ∂x 0 ∂x 1 ∂x n 
2
092407
3
2.5
Ideal Function
First Order Approximation
2 Second Order Approximation
Third Order Approximation
1.5
0.5
0
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
Figure 2.1. Approximating the Exponential Function by Polynomials Using the Minimax
Algorithm
The curves of approximating the exponential function by polynomials of the first, second, and third order using
the minimax algorithm are shown in Figure 2.1. Note that the curve for the third-order approximation is overlaid
onto the curve of the ideal function.
Figure 2.1 shows that the approximation improves as the order of the polynomial increases. The optimum
parameter vectors for first-, second-, and third-order approximations are [1.2647, 1.1752]T, [0.9892, 1.1305,
0.5539]T, and [0.9945, 0.9958, 0.5431, 0.1794]T, respectively.
Figure 2.2 shows the error between the ideal function f 1 (y) = ey and the various polynomial approximations.
3
092407
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Error
-0.1
First Order Approximation
Second Order Approximation
-0.2
Third Order Approximation
-0.3
-0.4
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
Figure 2.2. Estimation Errors of Various Polynomial Approximations
A unique feature of the minimax algorithm is that the error exhibits equal ripple properties. That is, the
maximum positive error and maximum negative error have the same absolute value.
For comparison, let us consider the least squares approximation [2], which is another well known estimation
method. This method approximates the known function f 1 (y) by another function f 2 (x; y) in the sense that the sum
of squared errors is minimized. The method of least squares has a particularly simple mathematical expression if the
approximation function can be expressed in the form of a power series, as in Equation (2.4).
K
f 2 (x; y) = ∑x
k =0
k yk (2.4)
If we want to force f 2 (x; y) = f 1 (y) at sample point y 1 , y 2 , . . , y N , we simply set up the following set of
equations:
∑x
k =0
k y kn = f 1 (y n ) n = 1, 2, . . , N (2.5)
where N is the number of sample points, and K+1 is the dimension of the parameter vector. This system of equations
can be expressed in a compact matrix form as
Ax = b (2.6)
where x = [x 0 , x 1 , . . , x K ]T (2.7)
b = [f 1 (y 1 ), f 1 (y 2 ), . . , f 1 (y N )]T (2.8)
4
092407
1 y1 .. y1K 
 
1 y2 .. y K2 
A=  (2.9)
: : :: : 
 
1 y N .. y KN 
In general, the number of samples N is larger than the dimension of the parameter vector, in which case Equation
(2.6) is an over-determined system for which there is no solution. The least squares method finds a particular
solution of Equation (2.6) such that the sum of the squared error is minimized. The error at each sample point is
K
e(y n ) = ∑x
k =0
k y kn – f 1 (y n ). The sum of the squared error E is
N
E= ∑ | e(y
n =1
n ) |2 (2.10)
The least squares solution has a simple matrix form given by
x = (ATA)–1ATb (2.11)
Figure 2.3 shows the estimation errors of the third-order approximation using the minimax and least squares
-3
x 10
6
4
Least Square
Minimax
2
0
Error
-2
-4
-6
-8
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
y
Figure 2.3. Estimation Errors of Least Squares and Minimax Methods
methods. The maximum absolute error of the least squares method is larger than that of the minimax method.
The parameter vectors of the least squares method of first-, second-, and third-order polynomials are [1.1937,
1.1140]T, [0.9892, 1.1305, 0.5539]T, and [0.9958, 0.9945, 0.5431, 0.1794]T, respectively.
5
092407
III. Applications to Filter Design
A digital finite impulse response (FIR) filter consists of a tapped delay line with a proper filter coefficient at the
output of each delay element. The FIR filter output is the weighted sum of signals at the tapped delay line. Figure
*
3.1 is a block diagram of an FIR filter where u(n) is the filter input, y(n) is the filter output, and w k represents the
filter coefficients, where k = 0, 1, . . , N–1. The FIR filter input/output relation is
N −1
y(n) = ∑w
k =0
*
k u(n − k) (3.1)
u(n) z–1 z–1 z–1
w *0 w 1* w *N -2 w *N -1
Σ
y(n)
Figure 3.1. Block Diagram of FIR Filter
The input vector u(n) and filter-weighting vector w are defined as
u(n) = [u(n) u(n–1) . . . , u(n–N+1)]T (3.2)
w = [w 0 , w 1 , . . . , w N–1 ]T (3.3)
Equation (3.1) can be expressed in compact matrix form as
y(n) = wHu(n) (3.4)
The frequency response of the FIR filter is given by the following equation:
H(f) = wHv (3.5)
where v = [1 e–j2πf . . . e–j2π(Ν−1)f]T (3.6)
The frequency response H(f) in Equation (3.5) depends on the filter-weighting vector w. A celebrated algorithm
to compute the weighting vector w to satisfy Equation (3.5) is the Parks-McClellan [3]. This algorithm is based on
the Chebyshev approximation criterion and implemented with the Remez exchange algorithm.
The program that we have developed is based on the minimax algorithm as well. Rather than starting from the
frequency response of Eq. (3.5), we start our filter design from the absolute square of the frequency response. The
absolute square of the frequency response is given by the following equation:
|H(f)|2 = wHvvHw = wHRw (3.7)
6
092407
 1 e j2πf  e j2π(N −1)f 
 − j2πf 
e 1  e j2π(N − 2)f 
where R = vvH.  (3.8)
     
 − j2π(N −1)f 
e e − j2π(N − 2)f  1 
The cost function C(f) is defined as the difference between the function |H(f)|2 and desired function |H d (f)|2, as
shown in Equation (3.9).
C(f) = |H(f)|2 – |H d (f)|2 = wHRw – |H d (f)|2 (3.9)
Because the desired function H d (f) is usually independent of the filter-weighting vector w, the gradient vector of
the cost function C(f) is
∇ w C = ∇ w w H Rw = 2Rw (3.10)
For a given desired frequency response, the filter coefficients can start at any arbitrary state w o . By using the
minimax algorithm stated in section 2, the filter-weighting vector is updated according to the following equation:
w(n+1) = w(n) ± 2αRw (3.11)
The choice of sign in Equation (3.11) depends on the sign of the cost function at its absolute maximum value:
negative if the cost function at the absolute maximum has positive value, and positive otherwise.
To guarantee that the algorithm converges [4], step size α has to satisfy the following equation:
2
α< (3.12)
λ max
where λ max is the maximum eigenvalue of matrix R evaluated at the frequency where the cost function has its
maximum absolute value. Since matrix R is a rank 1 matrix, there is only one nonzero eigenvalue.
λ max = ∑λ k
k = trace(R) = N (3.13)
1
In our algorithm, we choose step size α < .
N
A. Filter Design Example
The following example demonstrates our minimax filter design algorithm. Suppose we want to design a square
root raised cosine filter with a roll-off factor of 0.5. Assuming the sampling frequency is 4 times the symbol rate and
the FIR filter has 31 filter weights, Figure 3.2 shows the frequency response of this filter.
The green curve of Figure 3.2 is the ideal (desired) filter frequency response. The blue curve is the frequency
response of the filter designed by the minimax algorithm. The minimax frequency response of the filter in the
passband closely matches the ideal frequency response. The stop band exhibits an equiripple property with the
maximum stop band ripples about –25 dB. Expanding the frequency response in the passband, Figure 3.3 shows that
the passband ripple is very small, with the maximum value around 0.013 dB.
7
092407
5
-5
Minimax
-10 Ideal
Filter Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Normalized Frequency
Figure 3.2. Frequency Response of Square Root Raised Cosine Filter with Roll-off
Factor of 0.5 and Stop Band to Pass Band Cost Function Weight Ratio of Unity
0.02
0.01
Filter Gain (dB)
-0.01
Minimax
-0.02
Ideal
-0.03
-0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

Figure 3.3. Passband Frequency Response of Square Root Raised Cosine Filter with
Roll-off Factor of 0.5 and Stopband to Passband Cost Function Weight Ratio of Unity
Further stopband suppression can be achieved by using the weighted cost function, which is defined as
C(f) = W(f)[ |H(f)|2 – |H d (f)|2] (3.14)
8
092407
where W(f) is the weighting function. By assigning a larger value to W(f) in the stopband region, greater stopband
attenuation can be achieved. Figure 3.4 shows the frequency response of the same filter when the weight of the cost
function in the stop band is 50 times the weight of the cost function in the passband.
Figure 3.4 shows that by emphasizing the cost function in the stop band, maximum stop band ripple can be
suppressed to –35 dB. However, a heavier weighting to the cost function in the stop band creates a larger ripple in
the passband. Figure 3.5 shows that the maximum ripple in the passband increases to 0.063 dB, which is still quite
acceptable for most filter design applications.
Minimax
-10
Ideal
Filter Gain (dB)
-20
-30
-40
-50
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Figure 3.4. Frequency Response of Square Root Raised Cosine Filter with Roll-off
Factor of 0.5 and Stop Band to Pass Band Cost Function Weight Ratio of 50
9
092407
0.06
0.04
0.02
Filter Gain (dB)
-0.02
-0.04 Minimax
Ideal
-0.06
-0.08
-0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

Figure 3.5. Passband Frequency Response of Square Root Raised Cosine Filter with
Roll-off Factor of 0.5 and Stop Band to Pass Band Cost Function Weight Ratio of 50
IV. Application to Array Antenna Pattern Design

Signals transmitted over an antenna system generally have narrowband waveforms. A narrowband condition
exists when the signal bandwidth is small compared to c/D, where c is the speed of light and D is the diameter of a
circular antenna, or the length of a linear array antenna. A narrowband signal can be modeled by the following
equation:
j2πf c t
s(t) = m(t) e (4.1)
where m(t) is the baseband waveform and f c is the center frequency.
A. Unifor mly Spaced Linear Ar r ay (ULA)

A uniformly spaced linear array (ULA) antenna consists of M equally spaced antenna elements, as shown in
Figure 4.1. The spacing between elements is represented by d. If this ULA antenna is used to receive waveform
coming from an angle θ, the signal picked up by each element s k (t) is
s k (t) = s 1 (t–τ k ) = m(t–τ k )exp[j2πf c (t–τ k )], k = 1, 2, . . , M (4.2)
where
τk =
( k − 1) d cos θ
c
is the relative time delay of the kth element with respect to the first element. The speed of light c can be expressed as
f c λ, where λ is the wavelength at frequency f c . The term e -j2πfcτ k can be written as e j(k -1)β where β = –2πdcosθ/λ is
the electrical angle of the ULA.
10
092407
Wavefront
dcosθ θ
. . . . . . .
d
Figure 4.1. Uniformly Spaced Linear Array Antenna
With the narrowband assumption, m(t–τ k ) ≈ m(t), and exp[j2πf c (t–τ k )] = e j2πf c t e j(k -1)β , the signal at the kth
element can be expressed as
j(k -1)β
s k (t) = s 1 (t) e k = 2, 3, . . , M (4.3)
j2πf t
where s 1 (t) = m(t) e c is the reference signal at the first antenna element.
If the ULA antenna is used as the transmitting antenna, the antenna output is the sum of the products of element
weights and a corresponding element input signal. Using different element weights, we can make the antenna pattern
match the shape of the intended service region.
The ULA antenna pattern at a given angle θ is given by the following equation:
G(θ) = wHvvHw (4.4)
jβ j(M -1)β
where w = [w 1 , w 2 , . . , w M ]T is the element-weighting vector, and v = [1, e , . . , e ]T is the array manifold
vector. This equation has the same mathematical form as Equation (3.7). Thus the filter design technique can be
applied to the design of the ULA antenna pattern.
The antenna pattern of a ULA antenna with 20 elements of constant weight is shown in Figure 4.2. This pattern
has a mainlobe at the antenna boresight (θ = 90o), and the peak sidelobe gain is –13 dB. To avoid the lobe grating,
the inter-element spacing d is assumed to be one-half of the wavelength.
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.2. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Uniform Element Weights
11
092407
Any desired (ideal) antenna pattern can be realized using the minimax algorithm. The desired antenna pattern is
typically defined by one or several mainlobes with predefined beamwidth, mainlobe ripple, desired sidelobe gain
levels, and transition region. Usually, the pattern in the transition region is not important. Thus, we often do not
specify the pattern in the transition bands.
Assume that the desired antenna pattern has a unit gain in the interval 85o < θ < 95o and zero sidelobe gains in
the interval θ > 100o and θ < 80o. The antenna pattern of this ULA antenna with 20 elements is derived from the
minimax algorithm and shown in Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.3 shows that the sidelobe attenuation is 18.2 dB.
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.3. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function
Weight Ratio of Unity
B. Sidelobe Attenuation and Mainlobe Ripple Tr adeoff

If we allow for larger ripples in the mainlobe, we can further suppress the gains in the sidelobe. This can be
achieved by assigning a heavier weight to the cost function in the sidelobe region. Figure 4.4 shows that if the
weight in the sidelobe region is 10 times larger than the weight in the mainlobe region, the sidelobe can be
suppressed to –21.3 dB.
12
092407
5
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.4. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function
Weight Ratio of 10
The mainlobe ripples and sidelobe attenuation for the two cases are summarized in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 20-Element ULA Antenna with
Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of Unity and 10
Cost Function
Mainlobe Ripple Sidelobe Attenuation
Weight Ratio
(dB) (dB)
(Sidelobe/Mainlobe)
1 0.06 18.2
10 0.32 21.3
With 20 antenna elements and inter-element spacing of one-half of a wavelength, the mainlobe beamwidth of a
conventional dish antenna is about λ/D = 0.1 radians, or 5.73o. If the desired mainlobe beamwidth is less than this
value, the antenna pattern will be considerably worse. Figures 4.5 shows that if the desired antenna pattern has unit
gain in the interval 89o ≤ θ ≤ 91o and 3o roll-off on each side, the sidelobe amplitude can be as high as –13.5 dB.
By assigning a heavier weighting to the cost function in the sidelobe region, the sidelobe gain can be reduced.
Figure 4.6 shows the antenna pattern when the cost function in the sidelobe is weighted 10 times more than the cost
function in the mainlobe. The sidelobe amplitude is reduced to –17.2 dB. Note, however, that the mainlobe also
drops to –0.7 dB. The antenna patterns shown in Figures 4.5 and 4.6 for a smaller beamwidth are considerably worse
than the corresponding antenna patterns in Figures 4.3 and 4.4.
13
092407
5
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.5. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with 2o Mainlobe Beamwidth and
Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratio of Unity
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.6. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with 2o Mainlobe Beamwidth and
Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratio of 10
14
092407
Let us return to the assumed mainlobe beamwidth with a coverage region 85o < θ < 95o Increasing the number of
elements from 20 to 30 improves sidelobe suppression. Figure 4.7 shows that by increasing to 30 the number of
elements in the ULA antenna, we can achieve a 25.5 dB sidelobe suppression. The sidelobe level can be further
suppressed by assigning a heavier weight to the cost function in the sidelobe region. Figure 4.8 shows that if the cost
function in the sidelobe region is 10 times more than the weight in the mainlobe region, the sidelobe suppression
increases to 29.9 dB.
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.7. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe

Cost Function Weight Ratio of Unity
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.8. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe

Cost Function Weight Ratio of 10
15
092407
The mainlobe ripples and sidelobe attenuation are summarized in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 30-Element ULA

Antenna with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of Unity and 10
Cost Function
Weight Ratio
(dB) (dB)
(Sidelobe/Mainlobe)
1 0.01 25.5
10 0.04 29.9
Thus far, we have considered only the boresight case in which the mainlobe is centered at θ = 90º. The antenna
mainlobe can be placed at any arbitrary angle θ. In the following example, the mainlobe is assigned in the interval
between 40o and 50o and sidelobes in the interval θ > 55o and θ < 35o. The antenna pattern of a ULA antenna with
20 elements is shown in Figure 4.9.
Figure 4.9 shows that shifting the antenna mainlobe 45º off-boresight reduces the sidelobe suppression to 11.4
dB. The sidelobe can be suppressed by increasing the relative weight of the cost function in the sidelobe region. If
the relative weight of the cost function in the sidelobe is 10 times more than the cost function in the mainlobe, the
sidelobe attenuation increases to 17.1 dB. This antenna pattern is shown in Figure 4.10.
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.9. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern for Off-Boresight Beam with
16
092407
5
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.10. 20-Element ULA Antenna Pattern for Off-Boresight Beam with
The mainlobe ripples and the sidelobe attenuation are summarized in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 20-Element Off-Boresight

Antenna with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of Unity and 10
Cost Function
Weight Ratio
(dB) (dB)
(Sidelobe/Mainlobe)
1 0.3 11.4
10 0.9 17.1
As illustrated previously, increasing the antenna size to 30 elements produces a better antenna pattern. Figure
4.11 shows the 30-element ULA antenna pattern with mainlobe between 40o and 50o. The sidelobe attenuation
increases to 22.2 dB, while the ripples in the mainlobe region are only 0.25 dB.
17
092407
5
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)

-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.11. 30-Element ULA Off-Boresight Antenna Pattern with

Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratio of 10
Finally, by properly adjusting the element weights, multiple beams can be created from ULA antennas.
Assuming that we want two mainlobes centered at θ = 35o, and θ = 105o, each with a beamwidth of 10o, and a 10o
transition band at each side of the mainlobe. Figure 4.12 and Figure 4.13 show the antenna pattern of a 30-element
ULA antenna, with equally and unequally weighted cost functions, respectively. The mainlobe ripple and sidelobe
attenuation for both cases are summarized in Table 4.4.
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB)
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.12. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern for Multiple Beams with
Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of Unity
18
092407
5
-5
-10
Antenna Gain (dB) -15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.13. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern for Multiple Beams with
Table 4.4. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 30-Element

Antenna for Multiple Beams with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function
Weight Ratios of Unity and 10
Cost Function
Weight Ratio
(dB) (dB)
(Sidelobe/Mainlobe)
1 0.04 20
10 0.14 25
C. Two-Dimensional Ar r ay Antenna
The ULA antenna design can be extended to a two-dimensional array antenna with antenna elements uniformly
placed on the x-y plane. The antenna output is the weighted sum of the signals from each element. The antenna
pattern equation is the same as Equation (4.4) except that the array manifold vector is
jβ1
v = [e e jβ 2 . . . e jβ M ]T (4.5)
where the electrical angle β k is
β k = − 2π (x k sinθcosφ + y k sinθsinφ ) (4.6)

λ
and x k , y k are the coordinates of the kth element, and θ and φ are the boresight elevation and azimuth angles. Figure
4.14 shows the configuration of the two-dimensional array antenna system.
19
092407
k
θ
2
1
ri Wavefront
0 3
y
6 ϕ sensor
4
5
Figure 4.14. Two-Dimensional Array Antenna System
Consider a simple two-dimensional array consisting of 49 elements arranged in a 7 × 7 square grid with inter-
element spacing equal to half of a wavelength. Figure 4.15 shows the antenna pattern of this array in which all
elements have constant weights.
30 330
-20
-30
60 300 -40
-50
100 80 -60
60 40 20
90 270 -70
-80
-90
120 240 -100
-110
150 210 -120

180
Figure 4.15. Antenna Pattern of 7 × 7 Array Antenna with Constant
Weights
The desired antenna pattern is defined as the following:

1. Gain = 0 dB at the boresight at which elevation angle θ = 0o
2. Gain = –0.5 dB at θ = 5o
20
092407
3. Gain = –6 dB at θ = 10o
4. Sidelobe level as small as possible for θ > 20o
5. Symmetric antenna pattern with respect to azimuth angle.
Many factors, such as step size and the relative weight of the cost function in the mainlobe and sidelobe regions,
will influence the final antenna pattern. Figure 4.16 shows the antenna pattern for the uniformly weighted cost
function and fixed step size α = 0.015. After 100,000 iterations, the antenna pattern shown in Figure 4.16 has yet to
satisfy the design specifications.
30 330
-10
-15
60 300
-20
-25
100 80
60 40 20 -30
90 270
-35
-40
120 240 -45
-50
150 210 -55
180
Figure 4.16. Antenna Pattern of 7 × 7 Array Antenna with Constant
Step Size and Uniformly Weighted Cost Function
To guarantee that the adaptive process converges smoothly, we can use the “gear shift” step size. As the iteration
process goes on, step size is progressively reduced to avoid granular noise. This is referred to as “gear shift.” If we
introduce exponentially decaying step size such that
α(n) = α(0)(1 – ε)n (4.7)
where α(0) is the initial step size and ε is a small number, an antenna pattern can be obtained in much fewer
iterations. The antenna pattern for α(0) = 0.015 and ε = 5 × 10–5 is shown in Figure 4.17.
21
092407
0
30 330
-10
-15
60 300
-20
-25
10 8 6 4 2 -30
90 270
-35
-40
-45
120 240
-50
-55
150 210
180
Figure 4.17. 7 × 7 Array Antenna Pattern with Exponentially

Decaying Step Size and Uniformly Weighted Cost Function
Figure 4.18 shows the sliced antenna plot along the azimuth angles of 90o and 240o.
-5 Azimuth Angle = 90 Degree

Azimuth Angle = 240 Degree
-10
-15
Antenna Gain (dB)
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Elevation Angle (Degree)
Figure 4.18. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.17 along Azimuth Angles of 90o
and 240o
Employing different weighting values to the cost function in the mainlobe and sidelobes can produce better
sidelobe suppression. Figure 4.19 shows the antenna pattern of an antenna whose relative cost function weight in the
sidelobe region is 10 times greater than the corresponding weight in the mainlobe. Figure 4.20 shows the sliced
antenna plots along the azimuth angles of 90o and 240o. It shows that 20 dB sidelobe attenuation is achieved.
22
092407
0
30 330
-20
-30
60 300
-40
-50
100 80
60 40 -60
20
90 270
-70
-80
-90
120 240
-100
-110
150 210
180
Figure 4.19. 7 × 7 Array Antenna Pattern with Exponentially Decaying

Step Size and Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of 10
10
0
-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Figure 4.20. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.19 along Azimuth Angles of 90o
and 240o
Increasing the relative weight in the sidelobe region by a factor of 30 improves sidelobe attenuation to 23 dB.
The antenna plot and sliced antenna plots are shown in Figure 4.21 and Figure 4.22, respectively.
23
092407
0
30 330
-20
60 300 -30
-40
100 80
60 40 -50
20
90 270
-60
-70
120 240 -80
-90
150 210
180
Figure 4.21. Antenna Pattern of 7 × 7 Array Antenna with Exponentially
Decaying Step Size and Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe Cost Function Weight Ratios of 30

-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Figure 4.22. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.21 along Azimuth Angles of 90o and 240o
D. Phase Ar r ay Antenna Example

For this design example we chose to study a two dimensional phase array antenna of 312 elements uniformly
placed on a plane. The inter-element spacing used is d=1.5792 λ, where λ corresponds to the signal wavelength. The
antenna pattern for elevation angles between 0o and 10o with the same weight for every element is shown in Figure
4.23.
24
092407
0
30 330
-20
-30
60 300
-40
10 8 -50
6 4 2
90 270
-60
-70
120 240 -80
-90
150 210 -100

180
Figure 4.23. Antenna Pattern (Identical Element Weights)
Sliced along the azimuth angle of 90o and 225o, the sliced antenna plot is shown in Figure 4.24.
-10
-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40
-50

-70
-80
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 4.24. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.23
Suppose the antenna pattern specification is set as follows:

1. Gain at the boresight (θ = 0o) = 0 dB
2. Gain at θ = 0.5o = –0.1 dB
3. Gain at θ = 1o = –3 dB
4. Gain at θ > 3o be as small as possible
5. Symmetry antenna pattern in azimuth angle
Figure 4.25 shows the antenna pattern for elevation angle between 0o and 10o using the minimax algorithm and
the relative cost function weight in the sidelobe 10 times heavier than the cost function weight in the mainlobe
25
092407
0
30 330 -10
-20
60 300
-30
10 8 6 4 2
90 270 -40
-50
120 240
-60
150 210
180
Figure 4.25. Antenna Pattern with Relative Sidelobe Cost

Weighting 10 Times More Than the Mainlobe Cost Weighting
The “gear shift” step size is used in this case. Since our chosen design antenna has 312 elements, the initial step
size is α(0) = 0.003. To prevent the step size from becoming excessively small, the minimum step size is set to be
2 × 10–5.
To identify their sidelobe levels, the antenna plot can be sliced at azimuth angle of 180o and 280o. The sliced
antenna plots are shown in Figure 4.26. From this sliced antenna plot, it shows that the maximum sidelobe level is –
23 dB.

-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40
-50
-60
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
26
092407
Figure 4.27 shows the antenna plot if the relative cost function weighting in the sidelobe region is increased to
30.
30 330
-20
-30
60 300 -40
-50
10 8 6 -60
4 2
90 270
-70
-80
-90
120 240
-100
-110
150 210 -120

180
Figure 4.27. Antenna Pattern with Relative Sidelobe Cost

Weighting 30 Times More than the Mainlobe Cost
Figure 4.28 shows the sliced antenna plot at azimuth angles of 180o and 280o. This sliced antenna plot shows that
the maximum sidelobe level improves to –27 dB.
-10
-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40
-50
-60
-70
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 4.29 shows the beam pattern generated by the minimax algorithm when the antenna mainlobe moves to
(5o, 30o), assuming the same circular beam pattern with a 3 dB beamwidth equal to 2o. The relative weights of the
cost function in the sidelobe and mainlobe in this simulation is 30. This result is obtained with 5000 iterations, step
27
092407
size is α = 0.003 × 0.99(n–1). To prevent the step size from becoming too small, the minimum step size α min is set to
30 330
-20
-30
60 300
-40
-50
10 8 6 4 2 -60
90 270
-70
-80
120 240 -90
-100
150 210 -110
180
Figure 4.29. Antenna Pattern with Relative Weighting of Sidelobe Cost
to Mainlobe Cost Equals 30
be 10–5.
The antenna pattern shown in Figure 4.29 seems to have a relatively high gain in the region [8o < θ < 10o] and
[285o < φ < 300o]. Figure 4.30 shows the sliced antenna plot along azimuth angles of 30o, 180o, and 300o. Figure
4.31 shows the sliced antenna plot along elevation angles of 5o, 9o, and 10o. Those figures show that the worst
sidelobe amplitude is around –24dB.
-10
-20
Antenna Gain (dB)
-30
-40

-60
-70
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
28
092407
0
Elevation Angle = 5 Degree
-10 Elevation Angle = 9 Degree
-20
-30
Antenna Gain (dB)
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Azimuth Angle (Degree)
If the relative cost function weight in the sidelobe region increases to 60, better sidelobe suppression can be
achieved. Figure 4.32 shows the antenna pattern when the relative cost function weight in the sidelobe region is 60
times higher than the corresponding weight in the mainlobe. Figures 4.33 and 4.34 contain the sliced antenna plot
along the azimuth and elevation angles. The worst sidelobe amplitude in this case is reduced to –26 dB.
0
30 330
-20
-30
60 300
-40
-50
10 8 6 4 -60
2
90 270
-70
-80
-90
120 240
-100
-110
150 210
180
Figure 4.32. Antenna Pattern with Relative Weighting of Sidelobe

Cost to Mainlobe Cost Equals 60
29
092407
0
-10
-20
Antenna Gain (dB)

-30
-40
-50

-60
-70
-80
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 4.33. Sliced Antenna Plots of Figure 4.32
-20
-40
Antenna Gain (dB)
-60
-80
-100
-120
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Further increasing the relative cost function weight in the sidelobe region to a factor of 100 reduces the
maximum sidelobe amplitude to –27 dB. Figure 4.35 shows the antenna plot when the relative cost function weight
in the sidelobe is 100 times higher than the corresponding weight in the mainlobe. Figures 4.36 and 4.37 are the
sliced antenna plots along azimuth and elevation angles.
30
092407
0
30 330
-20
-30
60 300
-40
-50
10 8 6 4 -60
2
90 270
-70
-80
-90
120 240
-100
-110
150 210
180
Figure 4.35. Antenna Pattern with Relative Weighting of Sidelobe Cost to

Mainlobe Cost Equals 100
-20
-40
Antenna Gain (dB)
-60
-80
-100
-120
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
31
092407
0

-10
-20
Antenna Gain (dB) -30
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
V. Conclusions
The application of the minimax algorithm to digital filter design was well documented in the literatures. In this
study, we modified the digital filter design approach and extended the application to antenna beam design. In the
digital filter design application, Parks and McClellan use the Chebyshev approximation and Remez
exchange algorithm to design a linear phase finite impulse response filter. Our study shows that similar results can
be achieved by starting with the arbitrary initial filter coefficient vector and recursively updating it by using the
minimax algorithm. Chebyshev approximation is no longer necessary. Our study shows that the minimax algorithm
exhibits equal ripples in passband and stopband. Sidelobe suppression in the stopband can be further enhanced by
assigning a heavier weighting to the cost function in the sidelobe regions. This will introduce slight larger ripples in
the mainlobe (passband).
In the antenna pattern design application, rather than adjusting the gain and phase independently , the gain and
phase can be adjusted simultaneously by treating the weighting vector as a complex vector. Several important
conclusions of this study are:
1. Compared with the fixed antenna, an antenna pattern design based on the minimax algorithm provides
much better sidelobe suppression.
2. It is difficult to achieve a good antenna pattern if the desired antenna mainlobe beamwidth is smaller than
λ/D, where λ is the wavelength and D is the diameter of the antenna.
3. To avoid the granular noise, a proper forgetting factor has to be applied to the step size in the weighting
vector updating equation.
4. Converging time is closely related to the forgetting factor. A conservative forgetting factor requires a long
iteration time to make the algorithm converge.
5. Similar to the results for the filter design application, the minimax algorithm exhibits equal ripples in
antenna mainlobe and sidelobes.
6. Given a design specification, the optimum relative weighting of the cost functions can be experimentally
defined by extensive computer simulations.
VI. Suggested Future Work

The application of the minimax algorithm to the antenna pattern design presented in this paper can be extended
to cover the following topics.
1. To improve the coding efficiency by using matrix computation rather than loop operation.
32
092407
2. To evaluate the performance of multibeam design. This has important applications if the service regions are
separated by long distances, for example, the continental United States and Hawaii.
3. To guarantee the service quality, it is desired to have uniform gain over the intended service region. We
proposed studying the antenna beam shaping such that the antenna mainlobe follows the physical contour
of the service region.
4. The element weights are stored in memory with finite register size. Thus the antenna pattern due to the
quantization effect should be studied.
5. During the service lifetime, one or several antenna elements may cease to function. A statistical analysis
should be carried out to evaluate whether a satisfactory antenna pattern can be maintained even if a few
elements are not functioning properly.
VII. References
1
Hald Jorgen and Madsen Kaj, 1981 “Combined LP and Quasi-Newton Methods for Minimax Optimization” Mathematical
Programming 20 p. 49-62
2
Gilbert Strang, 2006 “Linear Algebra and its Applications, 4th Ed” Thomsen Brooks/Cole, ISBN 0-03-010567-6
3
Parks T. W. and McClellan J. H, 1972 “Chebyshev Approximation for Nonrecursive Digital Filter with Linear Phase” IEEE
Trans. Circuit Theory, p.189-194
4
Haykin Simon, 2002 “Adaptive Filter Theory, 4th Ed” Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-090126-1
Acknowledgement
We would like to express our sincere appreciation to Dr. David Scholler, senior project engineer of The
Aerospace Corpoaration, for providing us with the opportunity to explore the exciting field of applications of the
minimax algorithm. We would also like to thank Dr. James Yoh for providing many valuable comments and
suggestions during the course of this work.
33
092407

Antenna Pattern Design Based On Minimax Algorithm: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90009, United States

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antenna Pattern Design Based On Minimax Algorithm: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90009, United States

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Antenna Pattern Design Based on

H. K. Hwang 1 and Robert Grados 2

II. Minimax Algorithm

Figure 2.2. Estimation Errors of Various Polynomial Approximations

The least squares solution has a simple matrix form given by

Figure 2.3. Estimation Errors of Least Squares and Minimax Methods

u(n) z–1 z–1 z–1

The input vector u(n) and filter-weighting vector w are defined as

u(n) = [u(n) u(n–1) . . . , u(n–N+1)]T (3.2)

Equation (3.1) can be expressed in compact matrix form as

y(n) = wHu(n) (3.4)

H(f) = wHv (3.5)

where v = [1 e–j2πf . . . e–j2π(Ν−1)f]T (3.6)

|H(f)|2 = wHvvHw = wHRw (3.7)

C(f) = |H(f)|2 – |H d (f)|2 = wHRw – |H d (f)|2 (3.9)

w(n+1) = w(n) ± 2αRw (3.11)

-0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

C(f) = W(f)[ |H(f)|2 – |H d (f)|2] (3.14)

-0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06

IV. Application to Array Antenna Pattern Design

A. Unifor mly Spaced Linear Ar r ay (ULA)

Figure 4.1. Uniformly Spaced Linear Array Antenna

B. Sidelobe Attenuation and Mainlobe Ripple Tr adeoff

Figure 4.7. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe

Figure 4.8. 30-Element ULA Antenna Pattern with Sidelobe-to-Mainlobe

Table 4.2. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 30-Element ULA

Table 4.3. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 20-Element Off-Boresight

Antenna Gain (dB)

Figure 4.11. 30-Element ULA Off-Boresight Antenna Pattern with

Antenna Gain (dB) -15

Table 4.4. Mainlobe Ripple and Sidelobe Attenuation of 30-Element

β k = − 2π (x k sinθcosφ + y k sinθsinφ ) (4.6)

Figure 4.14. Two-Dimensional Array Antenna System

150 210 -120

The desired antenna pattern is defined as the following:

120 240 -45

150 210 -55

α(n) = α(0)(1 – ε)n (4.7)

Figure 4.17. 7 × 7 Array Antenna Pattern with Exponentially

-5 Azimuth Angle = 90 Degree

Figure 4.19. 7 × 7 Array Antenna Pattern with Exponentially Decaying

120 240 -80

-10 Azimuth Angle = 90 Degree

D. Phase Ar r ay Antenna Example

120 240 -80

150 210 -100

Figure 4.23. Antenna Pattern (Identical Element Weights)

-60 Azimuth Angle = 90 Degree

Figure 4.24. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.23

Suppose the antenna pattern specification is set as follows:

Figure 4.25. Antenna Pattern with Relative Sidelobe Cost

-10 Azimuth Angle = 180 Degree

Figure 4.26. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.23

150 210 -120

Figure 4.27. Antenna Pattern with Relative Sidelobe Cost

120 240 -90

150 210 -110

-50 Azimuth Angle = 30 Degree

Figure 4.30. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.29

Figure 4.31. Sliced Antenna Plot of Figure 4.29

Figure 4.32. Antenna Pattern with Relative Weighting of Sidelobe

Antenna Gain (dB)