See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260656635

Antenna design challenges for 4G

Article  in  IEEE Wireless Communications · December 2011

DOI: 10.1109/MWC.2011.6108324 · Source: dx.doi.org

CITATIONS READS

12 239

1 author:

Frank Michael Caimi

Florida Atlantic University
142 PUBLICATIONS   795 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Antenna Design for 4G View project

Compressive Sensing Underwater Laser Imaging View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Frank Michael Caimi on 20 March 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

LYT-INDUSTRY-Caimi 12/5/11 4:27 PM Page 4
I N D U S T RY P E R S P E C T I V E S
ANTENNA DESIGN CHALLENGES FOR 4G
FRANK M. CAIMI, PH.D.
The trend in mobile wireless devices has been to provide
faster access, improved processors, more memory, brighter and
higher resolution screens, additional connectivity with Wi-Fi, GPS,
third generation (3G), and fourth generation (4G) world
access — all with longer battery life in thinner, sleeker pack-
ages. Compound this with the desire of mobile operators to expand
their available band allocations, and what results is a difficult indus-
trial design arena, where suppliers are vying afor physical space
within the confines of a smartphone or similar device to
accommodate necessary components. One such component is
the antenna — essentially a transducer that converts time vary-
ing electrical current to radiated energy, and often considered
a last minute addition to the physical structure. Now with the intro-
duction of 4G and 1 × 2 or 2 × 2 multiple-input multiple-output
(MIMO) communications protocols, not one but two antennas are
needed, each with specific requirements typical of any trans-
ducer: bandwidth, efficiency, mutual coupling, size, and cost. With
newer Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) defini-
tions for carrier aggregation, simultaneous band coverage will
be also be necessary. These trends introduce significant challenges
for effective antenna design.
ANTENNA PHYSICAL DESIGN CONSTRAINTS
A number of factors affect MIMO antenna performance in
a handheld mobile communication device. While these factors are
related, they generally fall into one of three categories: anten-
na size, mutual coupling between multiple antennas, and
device usage models.
Antenna Size: The size of an antenna is dependent on three cri-
teria: bandwidth of operation, frequency of operation, and required
radiation efficiency. Bandwidth requirements have obviously
increased, now covering a frequency range from 698 to 2700 MHz.
A simple relationship exists between the bandwidth, size,
and radiation efficiency for the fundamental or lowest frequen-
cy resonance of a physically small antenna. Generally stated,
fractional bandwidth is proportional to the physical volume
(containing the majority of the antenna currents) multiplied by
the inverse of the radiation efficiency. Therefore, antenna
designers have at their command a design space where bandwidth,
antenna size, and efficiency can be traded. Since radio frequen-
cy (RF) currents exist not only on the antenna element but also
on the attached conductive structure or counterpoise, the actu-
al antenna is much larger that it visibly appears, and therefore
the bandwidth is also larger. Electromagnetic modal analysis of
a typical smartphone indicates that the fundamental mode is
just above 1 GHz; thus, performance bandwidth progressively
decreases at lower excitation frequencies. Covering 698–960 MHz
(bands 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 5, and 8) with a completely passive
antenna becomes difficult without making sacrifices in radia-
tion efficiency or size. In most cases, the requirements imposed
by operators suggest minimum radiation efficiencies of 40–50 per-
cent, so that meeting a minimum TRP requirement essentially
requires trade-offs between the power amplifier (PA) output
and the achievable antenna efficiency. In turn, poor efficiency
at the antenna translates to less battery life, as the PA must
compensate for the loss.
Mutual Coupling Limitations: Since the longitudinal dimen-
sion of the chassis is a primary contributor to the fundamental chas-
sis resonance mode, an antenna located at either end on top of
4 IEEE Wireless Communications • December 2011
the phone will excite nearly the same current modal distribu-
tion, and therefore produce virtually the same radiation pat-
tern. Since both antennas are coupled to the same mode, they
experience mutual coupling so that power introduced into one
antenna is partially coupled to the opposite antenna’s source resis-
tance, and is subsequently lost. A common solution is to relo-
cate one antenna to excite a different radiation mode on the chassis,
which can result in smaller bandwidth and efficiency depending
on the chassis width-to-length ratio. For 1 × 2 MIMO configu-
rations rolling out now, this approach can meet the –3 or –6 dB
relative efficiency requirement for the diversity antenna rela-
tive to the main antenna, but becomes an issue for 2 × 2 MIMO
due to the reduced efficiency/bandwidth trade-off, and subsequent
power loss.
There have been numerous approaches to solving this
dilemma, including various chassis modifications combined
with antenna placement, but these can be difficult for industri-
al designers to accommodate. Several recently developed
antenna design methods reduce mutual coupling through the
use of a single-structure antenna that optimally excites differ-
ent radiation modes (Fig. 1). The method reduces mutual coupling
between the antenna’s two feedpoints, resulting in a minimum
antenna pattern envelope correlation coefficient (APECC)
while providing improved efficiency and equal gain balance between
feedpoints.
Operator requirements for APECC can also be difficult to
achieve and to measure in real devices. Correlation measurements
can vary significantly depending on how the testing is done,
being influenced by cable connections, device positioning, and the
channel direction of arrival (DOA) probabilistic weighting.
Test methods for determining the overall MIMO performance
due to the combined effects of the antenna pattern, APECC,
and channel model are current topics in 3GPP, since MIMO
system performance depends on both the antenna configura-
tion and the channel model for the specific usage environment.
Furthermore, these effects change with the phone usage model
due to perturbations of the antenna near field radiation and
proximity detuning.
CURRENT SOLUTIONS
Obvious solutions would be to increase the antenna system size
(i.e., the antenna and phone chassis footprint) and/or reduce
the radiation efficiency. Since 4G smartphones require at least two
antennas, neither approach is necessarily practical from a
design standpoint. Some solutions also involve splitting the sys-
tem architecture into low band and high band sections, and
using separate antennas for each section, thereby doubling the
number of antennas.
Plausible solutions motivated by industry are the following:
• Limit the antenna(s) instantaneous bandwidth within cur-
rent antenna space allocations to allow use of two antennas
without compromising the industrial design (antenna sup-
plier motivation)
• Make the antenna(s) smaller to achieve a compact and
sleek device with greater functionality by limiting the
instantaneous bandwidth with same or improved antenna
efficiency (original equipment manufacturer [OEM] moti-
vation)
• Improve the antenna efficiency and therefore the network
performance by controlling the antenna instantaneous fre-
quency/tuning (operator motivation)
LYT-INDUSTRY-Caimi 12/5/11 4:27 PM Page 5

I N D U S T RY P E R S P E C T I V E S

10 100
Port 1 z
9 Port 2 90
8 80
Efficiency Pattern 1
7 70 50-58%
VSWR

6 60

η (%)
5 VSWR 50 x
4 <2.2:1 40 y
3 30
2 20

mm
1 10 Port 1
Band 13 Port 2 iMAT
0 0

50
0.7 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.8 0.7 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.8 antenna
f (GHz) Frequency (GHz)

0 1 y
x
Isolation
-5 <-13dB 10 1
0m
0.8 m Feeds
-10
-15 0.6 2
APECC

CC: z
S21

-20
<0.35
-25 0.4
Pattern 2
-30
0.2
-35 S12
Band 13 Band 13 x
-40 S21 0
0.7 0.72 0.74 0.76 0.78 0.8 700 720 740 760 780 800 y
f (GHz) Frequency (GHz)

Figure 1. Coupling and radiation patterns resulting for antennas at one end of the phone chassis using isolated mode antenna technology
(IMAT) — mutual coupling null results in higher efficiency and rotated antenna patterns, leading to reduced APECC.

• Make the antenna agile to adapt to different usage models
(OEM/user/operator motivation)
• Combinations of the above
Perhaps the simplest approach is to limit the instantaneous
operation to a single band and make the antenna frequency
agile on a band-by-band basis. This is the most basic type of
“state-tuned” antenna.
Not surprisingly, the industry is considering a variety of pos-
sibilities to provide adaptive or smart antennas. Adding
requirements for adaptability for different usage models, or to
accommodate different industrial designs or manufacturing
tolerances would suggest using more tuning states, or reconfig-
uring the antenna structure in response to sensors already
available in wireless devices.
The industry is also looking to further reduce the antenna
instantaneous bandwidth for subband operation through the
use of closed-loop feedback. These approaches are not for the
timid, as they involve the use of active components, which
introduce concerns over nonlinearity, stability, response time,
power handling capability, ESD compliance, and test method-
ology.
The choice of active components used for tuning depends
on the number of tuning states, the specific antenna design, the
frequency range to be covered, harmonic generation requirements,
and control interface capability. Tuning can be implemented with-
in the matching network or within the antenna itself to directly
control its resonance frequency.
Ultimately, to mitigate the effects of various usage models,
it may be necessary to combine the benefits of state tuning and
mode isolation. Modal isolation reduces mutual coupling and cor-
relation coefficient, while state tuning allows operation of the
antenna over the necessary range of frequencies for a given
space allocation and modal volume.
CONCLUSION
Significant challenges exist for antenna designers to meet
the needs of modern wireless devices, which will rely on imple-
mentation of MIMO protocols over an increasing spectral
range. Requirements to support lower frequencies associated with
newer band allocations in the United States, as well as the
need to add additional antennas, place significant design con-
straints on existing smartphone industrial designs. Usage mod-
els will likely drive more advanced antenna designs that reconfigure
to meet specific operational modes.

IEEE Wireless Communications • December 2011 5

LYT-INDUSTRY-Hansen 12/5/11 1:56 PM Page 6

I N D U S T RY P E R S P E C T I V E S

WIGIG: MULTI-GIGABIT WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS IN THE 60 GHZ BAND

CHRISTOPHER J. HANSEN, BROADCOM CORPORATION
INTRODUCTION
The Wireless Gigabit Alliance [1] — commonly called
WiGig — is an industry consortium devoted to the develop-
ment and promotion of wireless communications in the 60
GHz band. Recent advances in 60 GHz technology and demand
for higher-speed wireless connections are key drivers for
WiGig. Among the unlicensed frequency bands available for wire-
less networks, 60 GHz is uniquely suited for carrying extremely
high data rates (multiple gigabits per second) over short distances.
WiGig has developed a medium access control (MAC) layer, a
physical (PHY) layer, and several protocol adaptation layers (PALs)
to enable interoperable devices that take advantage of these
extremely high data rates. WiGig is also working closely with
standards bodies, including IEEE 802.11, and other industry groups,
such as the Wi-Fi Alliance, to help enable certification of stan-
dards-compliant devices.
EXTREMELY HIGH-SPEED APPLICATIONS
The motivation to develop 60 GHz communications comes
from a new class of applications that require extremely high-speed
wireless data. A summary of WiGig applications is shown in
Fig. 1.
High-speed video and computer display streaming, data
transfers and networking, as well as wireless bus are the key
applications. The data rate requirements for these applications all
exceed the capabilities of today’s wireless technologies. Thus,
the industry is motivated to pursue the use of 60 GHz commu-
nications.
THE 60 GHZ BAND
The unlicensed 60 GHz frequency band has more band- where Ae is the effective aperture area. The small wavelength
width available than all the other unlicensed bands combined. The (roughly 5 mm) means that a 16-element array with half wave-
worldwide spectrum availability is shown in Fig. 2. Even for the length spacing will occupy a space of about 20 mm ¥ 20 mm.
smallest allocation, there is more than 3 GHz of bandwidth
available, and most regions allow use of at least 7 GHz. In er. As the antenna gain is increased, the antenna beamwidth becomes
comparison, the 5 GHz unlicensed band has about 500 MHz of
Video
(1280 × 720~1920 × 1080p and beyond
uncompressed)
Video
(1280 × 720~1920 × 1080p and beyond
H.264 compressed)
Kiosk HD Blu-ray download
(25 Gbytes 1–5 min)
total usable bandwidth, and the 2.4 GHz band has less than 85 MHz
of bandwidth in most regions.
Additional bandwidth increases the channel capacity, but is not
sufficient to enable high-speed communications for practical appli-
cations. Interoperable systems that can exploit the wide bandwidth
at low cost are necessary. A specific challenge for 60 GHz is
overcoming the (often severe) path loss from transmitter to receiv-
er. The Friis equation is used to compute this effect:
Pt Gt Gr λ 2
Pr = ,
( 4 π R )2
where Pr is the received power, Pt is the transmitted power, Gt
is the transmitter antenna gain, Gr is the receiver antenna gain,
l is the wavelength, and R is the range from transmitter to
receiver. Typically, WiGig systems will operate at 10 dB higher
received power than IEEE 802.11n systems because the total noise
power from the wider bandwidth is much higher. Furthermore,
there is a loss of about 21 to 28 dB relative to the 2.4 and 5
GHz bands because of the shorter wavelength at 60 GHz.
Some of these losses can be offset by reducing the maximum
operating range. The remaining loss must be compensated for
by increasing the antenna gain.
Luckily, high antenna gains with small antenna sizes are
feasible at 60 GHz because, for a given antenna aperture, gain
scales inversely with the square of the wavelength. For a per-
fectly efficient antenna system,
4 π Ae
G= ,
λ2
Increasing antenna gain creates its own challenges, howev-
narrower. Very narrow antenna beamwidths — those
associated with 10 dB of antenna gain or more —
require automated antenna pointing, or beam-
forming. This was not an issue for IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n
systems that employ omnidirectional antennas. 60
GHz stations need to find each other, coordinate
operation, and optimize antenna settings in an
efficient, interoperable manner. WiGig addresses
these challenges in its MAC/PHY specification with
the design of its network architecture, access pro-
tocol, and PHY layer. A specific beamforming
protocol is also an integral part of the specifica-
tion.

WIGIG SPECIFICATIONS
File transfer
(2 Gbytes 30 s) The WiGig MAC and PHY layers provide
similar functionality to the IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n MAC
and PHY, but incorporate new features to enhance
Wireless I/O operation in the 60 GHz band. As mentioned ear-
(USB/PCIe) lier, beamforming is an integral part of the speci-
fication. There is a protocol to allow devices with
1 2 3 4 5 6 directional antennas to discover each other and estab-
Throughput (Gb/s) lish connections. Once connected, they can refine
antenna settings to maximize transmit and receive
Figure 1. WiGig applications. gains. As channels change, they can make contin-

6 IEEE Wireless Communications • December 2011

LYT-INDUSTRY-Hansen 12/5/11 1:56 PM Page 7
I N D U S T RY P E R S P E C T I V E S
uous adjustments to their antenna settings to max-
imize performance. This allows the highest data rates 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 GHz
possible, even with time varying channels, such as
those seen by mobile devices.
The PHY layer includes single-carrier (SC) modes
with data rates up to 4.6 Gb/s and orthogonal fre-
quency-division multiplexing (OFDM) modes
with data rates up to 7 Gb/s. It is expected that all
devices will employ SC modes, including low-
power mobile devices. OFDM modes are designed
for higher-performance systems that need the
highest possible data rates. Both the SC and
OFDM modes share a common preamble to promote
interoperability.
Channel coding in the WiGig PHY employs mod- Figure 2. 60 GHz worldwide spectrum availability.
ern low density parity check (LDPC) codes with rates
of 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, and 13/16. The same code sets are
employed for both SC and OFDM modes. The wide range of
code rates allows transceivers to choose the best code rate for
the particular fading channel condition they encounter. The codes
are specifically designed for implementations and include
properties to support both layer decoding and fully parallel
belief propagation decoding [2].
The WiGig MAC layer incorporates modes for both point-
to-point communication between two wireless devices and
wireless network access. Thus, both cable replacement and
Internet access use cases can be supported. There is also sup-
port for rapid transfer of connections between 60 GHz and the
2.4 and 5 GHz bands. This is useful if a mobile device moves
out of range of a 60 GHz connection. It can quickly fall back to
a lower-rate connection in one of the other unlicensed bands
and maintain seamless network connectivity.
The MAC and PHY also incorporate specific features to
support efficient transfer of very high-speed data. These fea-
tures include packet aggregation, block acknowledgment, and
advanced security with Advanced Encryption Standard-Galois
Counter Mode (AES-GCM) that requires fewer computations per
bit than earlier AES modes in IEEE 802.11.
WiGig is developing PAL specifications to address common 60
GHz applications. Each PAL layer sits directly over the MAC layer
and acts as an interface between the 60 GHz MAC/PHY and a
bus or display interface. This functionality is in contrast to the
typical IP networking model that has an additional IP stack sit-
ting on top of the MAC. The PAL interface model has a sim-
pler design that is suitable for cable replacement applications. The
IP model is more suited to network access. WiGig supports
either or both models of operation. The two models can even work
simultaneously. For example, a device may use a WiGig 60
GHz MAC/PHY to carry both streaming video over a PAL and
a high-speed Internet connection over an IP stack.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The state of 60 GHz communications technology has
developed from experience with current wireless LAN sys-
tems and significant research developments over the past decade.
Continued research will help drive the technology forward,
IEEE Wireless Communications • December 2011
View publication stats
U.S. and Canada (57.05−64.00)
Japan (59.00−66.00)
Australia (59.40−62.90)
Europe (57.00−66.00)
China (59.00−64.00)
South Korea (57.00−64.00)
lowering costs and enabling new products and applications.
Of particular interest to the industry are improvements in cir-
cuit design and packaging, beamforming techniques to com-
pensate for non-line-of-sight channels, and new media access
techniques.
Lower-cost methods for packaging and connecting 60 GHz cir-
cuits [3] will help foster integration into different types of plat-
forms, such as portable devices. Further improvements in
complementary metal oxide semicondunctor (CMOS) circuit design
at 60 GHz, particularly power amplifier efficiency [4], will help
to improve battery life and expand communication range. For next-
generation systems, it will be also be necessary to develop
beamforming techniques specifically designed for non-line-of-
sight radio channels [5]. Also, improvements in multiple access
techniques [6] will allow denser deployments at higher data
rates.
SUMMARY
The Wireless Gigabit Alliance has been working to leverage
the state of the art in millimeter-wave technology to enable
widespread use of the unlicensed 60 GHz bands. The WiGig MAC,
PHY, and PAL specifications have been specifically designed
to enable a wide range of applications that demand extremely high
data rates. By working with other bodies for standardization
and certification, it is expected that devices employing WiGig tech-
nology will soon be available in the marketplace.
REFERENCES
[1] WiGig White Paper: Defining the Future of Multi-Gigabit Wireless Com-
munication, retrieved from http://www.wigig.org/specifications/
[2] A. Blanksby, B. Shen, and J. Trachewsky, “LDPC Code Set for mmWave
Communication,” Int’l. Wksp. mmWave Commun.: From Circuits to Net-
works (mmCom 2010), Chicago, IL, Sept. 2000.
[3] G. Liu et al., “Low-loss, Low-cost, IC-to-Board Bondwire Interconnects for
Millimeter-Wave Applications,” 2011 IEEE MTT-S Microwave Symp. Dig.
[4] J. Chen and A. Niknejad, “A Compact 1V 18.6 dBm 60 GHz Power Ampli-
fier in 65nm CMOS,” 2011 IEEE Int’l. Solid-State Circuits Conf.
[5] S. Wyne et al., “Beamforming Effects on Measured mm-Wave Channel
Characteristics,” IEEE Trans. Wireless Commun., vol. 10, no. 10.
[6] S. Singh, R. Mudumbai, and U. Madhow, “Interference Analysis for High-
ly Directional 60-GHz Mesh Networks: The Case for Rethinking Medium
Access Control,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Net., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1513–27.
7