You are on page 1of 5

The Study of Meander Line for Microstrip and Planar Design

D. Misman1, I. A. Salamat1, M. F. Abdul Kadir1, M. R. Che Rose1, M. S. R. Mohd Shah1,


M. Z. A. Abd. Aziz1, M. N. Husain1, P.J Soh2
1

Fakulti Kejuruteraan Elektronik dan Kejuruteraan Komputer


Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka
Karung Berkunci 1200, Hang Tuah Jaya, Ayer Keroh, 75450, Melaka, Malaysia
dalila_misman@yahoo.com.my
mohamadzoinol@utem.edu.my
2

School of Computer and Communication Engineering,


Universiti Malaysia Perlis (UniMAP),
Kangar, Perlis, Malaysia
pjsoh@unimap.edu.my

Abstract-- In this paper, the meander line antenna (MLA) have been designed to operate at 2.4-GHz for WLAN application.
Two different designs of meander line antenna are investigated, without conductor line and with conductor line. Microwave
Office software is used for simulation designed process. The antenna is fabricated on a double-sided FR-4 printed circuit
board using an etching technique. Then the design has been tested with the Advantest Network Analyzer. The comparison
between simulation and measurement results for the return loss and radiation patterns were presented. A bandwidth of 80
MHz and return loss of -37.7 dB were obtained at frequency 2.4 GHz. The gain is comparable to microstrip yagi antenna.
Index Terms antenna, meander line, meander line antenna, WLAN

II. DIMENSION CALCULATION


I. INTRODUCTION
Meander line antenna is one type of the microstrip
antennas. Meander line technology allows designing
antennas with a small size and provides wideband
performance [1]. Meander line antennas are an
interesting class of resonant antennas and they have
been widely studied in order to reduce the size of the
radiating elements in wire antennas: monopole, dipole
and folded dipole type antennas [2]. In meander line
antennas, the wire is continuously folded to reduce the
resonant length. Increasing the total wire length in
antenna of fixed axial length lowers its resonant
frequency. According to S. Best, when made to be
resonant at the same frequency, the performance
characteristics of these antennas are independently of
the differences in their geometry or total wire length
[3]. Uniform U- MLA structures, the geometry are
described to 3 parameters: the number of turns, and
length of the horizontal and vertical section. For NUMLA these are no tied values for the variables [4]. In
[5], compact frequency tunable planar meander line
monopole antennas for mobile terminal applications
are present. The operating frequency is the frequency
where the reflection coefficients are less then -20 dB
[6]. The good return loss for antenna is less than -10
dB [6].

In this paper, the antenna designs will use microstrip


technology and FR4 board for the material substrates.
The dielectric constant is r =4.7, loss tangent

tan = 0.019, and the thickness d=1.6mm. The


conductor width (W) of rectangular patch can be found
from [7]. The calculated length and width are L=
61mm and horizontal length, W= 37mm. The value of
conductor width is W=3mm. The effective dielectric
constant of the microstrip line for W/h >1, r = 3.4 .
The wavelength of the antenna o = 68mm . The
design calculation is given by [7].
III. ANTENNA DESIGN: SIMULATED AND
MEASURED RESULTS

Fig. 1 Photograph of the MLA with conductor line

Fig. 2 MLA without conductor line (Design I).

978-1-4244-2858-8/08/$25.00 2008 IEEE

B. Impedance 50 Ohm- Planar antenna design

Fig. 3 MLA with conductor line (Design II).

The investigation has been done for different type of


feeding and with and without conductor line. The
parameters of the meander line antenna which is
considered in this paper are horizontal length (h),
vertical length (v), and the number of turns (N). Fixed
conductor line length (C2) and conductor line width
(C1) of 59.7mm and 7.1mm are set for Design II and
IV. The horizontal length of 11mm, vertical length v =
9 mm and number of turn N=5 will give the best return
loss for Design I, and II. The length of horizontal h
=8mm, vertical length v = 9 mm and number of turn
N=5 produced a satisfactory frequency response at 2.4
GHz for Design III and IV.
C. Microstrip Antenna Design

Fig. 4 MLA without conductor line (Design III).

Fig. 6 shows the return loss for Design I and Design


II. The simulation result for Design II shows that the
operating frequency of 2.4 GHz with -37.7dB of return
loss as shown in Fig. 6. The bandwidth of 55MHz
(2.38%) and 80MHz (3.33 %) was found for Design I
and Design II respectively. Design IV operates at
2.4GHz with return loss -20.53dB.
Fig. 5 MLA with conductor line (Design IV).

IV. SIMULATION RESULT

Design I

A. Impedance 50 Ohm- Microstrip Antenna Design


Investigation on the effects of different dimension to
the meander line antenna has been done for Design I
and II. The parameters of the meander line antenna
which is considered in this paper are horizontal length
(h), vertical length (v), conductor line length (C2),
conductor line width (C1) and the number of turns (N).
Horizontal length of 11mm will give the best return
loss for Design II. The frequency response is found at
2.4GHz with return loss=-37.7dB. The return loss of 19.57dB was obtained at the same frequency for
Design I. Design II with v = 9.0 mm will give a return
loss of -37.7 dB. While, Design I for v = 9.0 mm will
give a return loss of -19.57 dB at 2.4 GHz. The
conductor length of 59.7 mm for Design II produced
optimal frequency response at 2.4 GHz with a return
loss of -37.7 dB. The return loss seems to decrease as
the length of conductor line is increased. The length of
conductor width C1 = 7.1 mm produced a satisfactory
frequency response at 2.4 GHz with return loss -37.7
dB. It is also concluded that the width of the conductor
line does not affect the frequency response. Design II,
with number of turn N = 5 produced a return loss of 37.7 dB at 2.4 GHz. On the other hand, Design I shows
that N = 5 will give frequency response at 2.4 GHz
with a return loss of -19.57 dB.

Design II

Fig. 6 Frequency response for Design I and Design II.

Fig. 7 Frequency response for Design IV


E-Plane
Design II

E-Plane
Design I

H-Plane
Design II

H-Plane
Design I

Fig. 8 The radiation pattern for Design I and Design II at


frequency

2.4GHz.

E-Plane
Design IV
at 5.8 GHz

E-Plane
Design IV
at 2.4GHz

E.. Impedance 75 Ohm- Planar antenna design

Fig. 9 Radiation pattern for Design IV

Fig. 12: Antenna Dimension

TABLE 1
SIMULATION RESULTS FOR MICROSTRIP ANTENNA
Simulation
Design I
Design II
Design IV
Frequency
2.4
2.4
2.4
Response (GHz)
Return Loss (dB)
-19.57
-37.7
-20.53
Bandwidth
(MHz)
HPBW -H-field
(degree)
HPBW -E-field
(degree)

57MHz
(2.38%)

84

80MHz
(3.33 %)

88

40 0

110MHz
(4.58%).

92

52 0

Fig. 13: Simulation Frequency Response

480

D. Planar Antenna Design


Frequency Response for Design I
and II (GHz )

Return Loss (dB)

0
-2 0

-4
-6
-8

Fig. 14: Simulation Radiation Pattern

TABLE 3

Return
Loss
Design I
(dB)

SIMULATION RESULTS (IMPEDANCE 75 OHM)

Simulation
Frequency response (GHz)
Return Loss (dB)
Bandwidth (GHz)

Return
Loss
Design II
(dB)

-10
-12
-14
Fre que ncy (GHz)

Fig. 10 Frequency response for Design I and II

V. MEASUREMENT RESULT

Frequency Response for Design III


and IV (GHz )

Return Loss (dB)

0
0

10

-10
-20

The measured result (microstrip design) of return loss


in room temperature is larger than the simulation result.
This is caused by inaccuracies in the fabrication
process, the effect of the SMA connector and errors in
processing. The designed antenna has been fabricated
by using chemical etching technique.

Return
Loss
Design III
(dB)
Return
Loss
Design IV
(dB)

-30
-40

Design I
2.4
-20.08
4.5 (1.89%)

Frequency Response
(GHz)

Fig. 11 Frequency response for Design III and IV


Return Loss (dB)

TABLE 2
COMPARISON BETWEEN FOUR DESIGNS
h

Freque

Lower n

RL

BW

(mm

ncy

upper

(dB)

(GHz)

(GHz)

freq.(GHz)

Design I

11

2.4

1.26-4.66

-12

3.4

Design II

11

2.4

1.12-4.4

-12.45

3.28

Design III

2.4

0.14-6.09

-34.93

5.95

Design IV

2.4

0.01-6.25

-29.97

6.24

Simulation
Results

0
-5 0. 5
-10
-15

1. 5

2. 5

3. 5

Design I

-20

Design II

-25
-30
-35
-40

Fr e que n c y ( GH z )

Fig. 15 Result measurements for Design I and II.

TABLE 4
MEASUREMENT RESULTS FOR PLANAR
ANTENNA DESIGNED

Return Loss (dB)

Return Loss (dB)

0
-5

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

3.2

3.4

Measurement

Design
I

Design
II

Design
III

Design
IV

Frequency
response
(GHz)

2.39

2.52

2.52

2.4

Return Loss
(dB)

-16.5

-13.45

-22.5

-15.3

Bandwidth
(MHz)

71MHz
(2.98%)

38MHz
(1.33%)

43MHz
(1.79%)

70MHz
(2.92%)

-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
Frequency (GHz)

Fig. 16 Result measurements for Design IV

F. Impedance 75 Ohm- Planar antenna design


Fig. 17 Radiation pattern Design I (normalized)
Return Loss (dB)

Return Loss (dB)

0
-5

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
Frequency (GHz)

Fig. 20 Frequency Response Design I


Fig. 18 Radiation pattern Design II (normalized)

TABLE 5
MEASUREMENT RESULTS (IMPEDANCE 75 OHM)

Fig. 19 Radiation pattern Design IV (normalized)

TABLE 3
MEASUREMENT RESULTS FOR MICROSTRIP
ANTENNA DESIGNED
Measurement
Design I
Design II
Design IV
Frequency
Response (GHz)

2.35

2.375

2.43

Return Loss (dB)

-16.32

-35.42

-24.68

Bandwidth (MHz)

64MHz
(2.7%)

56MHz
(2.36%)

68MHz
(2.8%)

36 0

480

440

20 0

320

560

HPBW -H-field
(degree)
HPBW -E-field
(degree)

Measurement

Design I

Frequency response (GHz)

2.4

Return Loss (dB)

-19.66

Bandwidth (MHz)

57MHz (2.38%)

Gain (dB)

4dB
VI. CONCLUSION

The meander line antenna design with conductor line


will provide better performance. The horizontal length h
= 11 mm, the vertical length v = 9 mm, conductor length
C2 = 59.7 mm, conductor width C1 = 7.1mm and number
of turn N = 5 is chosen as the optimal dimension
operation at the WLAN frequency of 2.4 GHz. The best
return loss for the antenna is -37.70 dB (simulated) and
24.68 dB (measured) at frequency 2.43 GHz. The planar
meander line antenna designs for Design I and Design IV
posses a larger bandwidth. The best return loss for the
planar antenna designed (impedance 75Ohm) is -19.66dB
(measured) with gain 4dB.

REFERENCES
[1] A. Khaleghi. A. Azooulay. J. C. Bolomey,
A Dual Band Back Couple Meandering
Antenna For Wireless LAN Applications,
Gof Suryvette, France, 2005.
[2] H. Nakono. H. Tagami. A. Yoshizawa. and
J.Yamauchi, Shortening ratios of modified
dipole antennas, IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propagat., Vol. AP-32, pp. 385-386, Apr.
1984.
[3] S. Best, On the resonant properties of the
Koch fractal and other wire monopole
antennas, IEEE Antennas and Propagation
Soc. Int. Symp, June 22-27, 2003, pp. 856859.
[4] Constine A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: A
review,New York, Wiley, 1992.
[5] V. K. Palukuru, M. Komulainen, M. Berg,
H. Jantunen and E. Salonen, FrequencyTunable Planar Monopole Antenna for
Mobile Terminals EuCAP 2007,
Edinburgh, UK, November 2007.

[6] Elsherbeni, A. Z. J. Chen, C. E. Smith, and,


FDTD analysis of meander line antennas
for personal communication applications,
Progress In Electromagnetics Research,
PIER 24, 185-199, 1999
[7] Constantine A. Balanis, Antenna theory
analysis and design, Wiley- Interscience,
John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken: New Jersey.