This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.
1 2005, c T
¨
UB
˙
ITAK
Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip
Patch Antenna Arrays for the Wireless
Communication
Gonca C¸ AKIR
1
. Levent SEVG
˙
I
2
1
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering,
Kocaeli University, KocaeliTURKEY
email: gonca@kou.edu.tr
2
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering, Do˘gu¸s University,
Zeamet Sokak, No 21, Acıbadem,
˙
IstanbulTURKEY
email: lsevgi@dogus.edu.tr
Abstract
Typical lowcost, lowweight microstrip base station antenna arrays with beamscanning capabilities
are taken into account. In downtowns of large cities like New York, Chicago, and in historical cities
like Istanbul, where high buildings are separated by narrow but densely occupied streets, antenna arrays
with approximately 20
◦
−35
◦
beamwidths are required to complete the cellular communication coverage.
To meet this requirement, new antenna arrays are designed with 35
◦
beamwidths and 60
◦
electronic
scanning capabilities. Their characteristics are investigated both numerically and experimentally. An
FDTDbased antenna simulation package (MPATCH) is prepared, tested on canonical structures and
against the literature ﬁrst, for veriﬁcation and calibration. Then, the characteristics of the designed
arrays are investigated via MPATCH. Finally, the arrays are experimentally veriﬁed. It is illustrated
that, the results of simulations and experiments agree very well, and the arrays meet the design criteria.
Key Words: Wireless communication, microstrip, patch antenna array, beam scanning, beam forming,
FDTD, numerical simulation.
1. Introduction
Parallel to the rising importance of wireless communication systems and personnel IT (information tech
nologies) services (e.g., Bluetooth) increasing eﬀorts are devoted to the design and implementation of novel
microstrip structures from miniaturized electronic circuits to the antenna arrays. One major application
is design of microstrip antenna arrays which are attractive candidates for adaptive systems in the present
and future communication systems. Their main advantages are light weight, low cost, planar or conformal
layout, and ability of integration with electronic or signal processing circuitry [see, e.g., 1].
Designing active / passive microwave circuits, on the other hand, requires understanding of both math
ematical relations (i.e., the theory) and applications (i.e, computer simulations as well as measurements).
Mathematical relations exist for only simple, idealized microstrip structures and may help to understand
93
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.1, 2005
only the fundamentals. Fortunately, powerful numerical simulation methods are available which can be used
to design complex microstrip structures. Among the others are the ﬁnitediﬀerence time domain (FDTD),
the transmission line matrix (TLM), the ﬁnite element (FE) and method of moments (MoM). All of these
methods have continuously been applied to broad range of physical problems, from electromagnetics to me
chanics and the reader may reach hundreds of references for diﬀerent topics via a simple internet search
(therefore no references are given in this article for their pioneering and characteristic applications).
This article describes the design, simulation and testing of microstrip patch array antenna for the
current wireless communication systems which operates at 1.8 GHZ band, with 35
◦
beamwidths, up to 60
◦
electronic scanning capabilities. These beamwidths are chosen because they become almost standard for
base station applications [2]. The antennas are analyzed with FDTDbased, inhouse prepared MPATCH
package. The FDTD [3] is chosen just because it is simple to implement, widely accepted, and very eﬀective
in visualisation [4,5].
2. Design Principles
The designed antenna is a 3×3 array. The ﬁrst step in the design is to specify the dimensions of a single
microstrip patch antenna. The patch conductor can be assumed at any shape, but generally simple geometries
are used, and this simpliﬁes the analysis and performance prediction. Here, the halfwavelength rectangular
patch element is chosen as the array element (as commonly used in microstrip antennas) [6]. Its characteristic
parameters are the length L, the width w, and the thickness h, as shown in Figure 1.
To meet the initial design requirements (operating frequency = 1.8 GHz, and beamwidth = 35
◦
)
various analytical approximate approaches may be used. Here, the calculations are based on the transmission
line model [7]. Although not critical, the width w of the radiating edge is speciﬁed ﬁrst. The squarepatch
geometry is chosen since it can be arranged to produce circularly polarized waves. In practice, the length L
is slightly less than a half wavelength (in the dielectric). The length may also be speciﬁed by calculating the
halfwavelength value and then subtracting a small length to take into account the fringing ﬁelds [810], as:
L =
c
2f
0
√
ε
e
−2∆L (1)
Where c is the velocity of light and
∆L = 0.412h
(ε
e
+ 0.3)
w
h
+ 0.264
(ε
e
− 0.258)
w
h
+ 0.813
, ε
e
=
ε
r
+ 1
2
+
ε
r
− 1
2
1
1 + 12h/L
, (w/h ≥ 1) (2)
Here, ε
e
and f
o,
∆L are eﬀective relative permittivity, the operating frequency, and the fringe factor,
respectively.
94
C¸ AKIR, SEVG
˙
I: Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch...,
Ground plane
h
w
Metallic patch
L
Figure 1. A rectangular patch antenna.
From these approximate calculations, the dimensions of the squareshaped microstrip patch antenna
element are speciﬁed as shown in Figure 2. For a linear array with a uniform excitation, the beamwidth is
given by [11],
θ
3dB
= cos
−1
¸
sin(θ
0
) − 0.443.
λ
0
−cos
−1
¸
sin(θ
0
) + 0.443.
λ
0
(3)
where θ
0
is the main beam pointing angle, λ
0
is the freespace wavelength, and is the total array length.
The total array length is found to be
∼
= 23 cm for the 35
◦
beamwidth.
a
w
y
x
a
w
b
y
b
x
PML8
w = 5.52 cm
h = 1mm
ε
r
= 2.2
a = 2.758 cm
Figure 2. The square patch element and the dimensions.
When the interelement distance is selected to be halfwavelength the 3×3 array satisﬁes 35
◦
beamwidth
on both planes normal to the patch surface. The 3x3 patch array is pictured in Figure 3.
a
w
w
w = 5.516 cm
h = 1 mm
ε
r
= 2.2
a = 2.758 cm
h
Figure 3. The 3×3 patch array that operates at 1.8 GHz, and with 35
◦
beamwidth.
95
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.1, 2005
3. MPATCH Package, its Calibration and Canonical Compar
isons
The FDTD (ﬁnite diﬀerence time domain) technique developed by K.S. Yee [3], discretizes the two Maxwell
curl equations directly in time and spatial domains, and put them into iterative forms. The physical geometry
is divided into small (mostly rectangular or cubical, but nonorthogonal in general) cells. Both time and
spatial partial derivatives are handled with ﬁnite central diﬀerence approximation and the solution is obtained
with a marching scheme in iterative form. The characteristics of the medium are deﬁned by three parameters,
permittivity, conductivity and permeability, and three electric and three magnetic ﬁeld components are
calculated at diﬀerent locations of each cell. Beside the spatial diﬀerences in ﬁeld components, there is
also a half time step diﬀerence between electric and magnetic ﬁeld components, which is called as leapfrog
computation. The three dimensional (3D) FDTD Yee cell is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Locations of three neighbouring Yee cells in 3D.
The diﬀerential time domain Maxwell equations in a linear, isotropic and nondispersive medium are
∇× E = −
∂B
∂t
, ∇×H =
∂D
∂t
+J (4)
∇.D = ρ , ∇.B = 0 (5)
where D = εE and B = µH. Here,
E [V/m] : electric ﬁeld J [A/m
2
] : the current density
H [A/m] : magnetic ﬁeld ρ [q/m
3
] : vol. charge density
D [q/m
2
] : el. displacement vector ε [F/m] : permittivity
B [Wb/m
2
] : mag. ﬂux density µ [H/m] : permeability
σ [S/m] : conductivity
96
C¸ AKIR, SEVG
˙
I: Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch...,
All the parameters are vector quantities, except ε, σ, ρ and µ. This is all the information needed
for linear isotropic materials to completely specify the ﬁeld behaviour over time so long as the initial ﬁeld
distribution is speciﬁed and satisﬁes the Maxwell’s equations.
Using the Taylor’s expansion and discretizing partial derivatives directly in time and spatial domain
yield the wellknown FDTD iterative equation. Three electric and three magnetic ﬁeld components are
calculated at diﬀerent locations within the reference cell in such a way so as to minimize the computational
eﬀort after the discretization of two curl equations by using centraldiﬀerence approach (or by taking up the
second order terms in their Taylor’s expansion). Besides, there is also a half time step diﬀerence between
electric and magnetic ﬁeld components, which is called as leapfrog computation (i.e., electric and magnetic
ﬁelds are calculated at time instants t=∆t, 2∆t, 3∆t, ... and t=∆t/2, 3∆t/2, 5∆t/2, ..., respectively,
where ∆tis the time step size).
For a lossy and sourcefree region, e.g., two of the iterative FDTD equations are
H
˜ n
x
(i, j, k) = H
˜ n−1
x
(i, j, k) +
∆t
µ
0
∆z
E
n
y
(i, j, k) − E
n
y
(i, j, k −1)
−
∆t
µ
0
∆y
[E
n
z
(i, j, k) −E
n
z
(i, j −1, k)]
(6)
E
n
y
(i, j, k) =
2ε − σ∆t
2ε + σ∆t
E
n−1
y
(i, j, k)
−
2∆t
(2ε +σ∆t)∆x
H
˜ n
z
(i, j, k) − H
˜ n
z
(i −1, j, k)
+
2∆t
(2ε +σ∆t)∆z
H
˜ n
x
(i, j, k) − H
˜ n
x
(i, j, k − 1)
(7)
Here, ∆x, ∆y and ∆z are the spatial steps (cell dimensions) in (x, y, z) directions, respectively. One
FDTD Yee cell occupies a ∆x×∆y×∆z volume. The spatial steps ∆x, ∆y and ∆z may be either taken as
equal (Yee cube) or diﬀerent (Yee rectangular prism). Everything inside this cell is assumed to be constant.
Calculations are performed at distinct instants t
1
, t
2
, t
3
, . . . , where t
1
=∆t, t
2
=2∆t, t
3
=3∆t, . . . , with a
chosen time step ∆t. The integer n is used to denote a number of time steps since the iterations starts. The
integers i, j, k are used to mention number of cells from the origin in x, y and z directions, respectively. A
half timestep diﬀerence between electric and magnetic ﬁelds is denoted by ˜ n = n + 1/2.
Numerical simulations used to investigate the designed patch arrays are performed via the MPATCH
package that is based on the FDTD method. The FDTD computation volume in the MPATCH is terminated
by PML (perfectly matched layer) (very often 610 cell length) blocks which simulates freespace eﬀectively.
Also, a neartofarﬁeld (NTFF) transformation module is added to handle farﬁeld projections, which are
necessary in antenna radiation pattern simulations.
The MPATCH package is ﬁrst calibrated against another powerful time domain simulator TLMANT
[7,12], which is based on the transmission line matrix method. Sample microstrip structures are used during
these tests and scattering (S) parameters are calculated via both packages. The Sparameters in frequency
domain is obtained from time domain simulation data as follows (see ﬁgure 5):
Assume the microstrip structure as a two port device (with port 1 and 2).
First, observe and store ycomponent of the voltage at port 1 for an inﬁnite microstrip line (without
structure); this yields the incident voltage, V
+
1
(t).
97
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.1, 2005
Then, repeat the same observation (with the structure) at both ports, which yields V
t
1
(t) (total ﬁeld)
at port 1, and V
−
2
(t), (reﬂected ﬁeld) at port 2.
Take the Fourier transforms of all and calculate S
11
and S
21
from
S
11
(f) =
V
−
1
(f)
V
+
1
(f)
=
V
t
1
(f) − V
+
1
(f)
V
+
1
(f)
, S
21
(f) =
V
−
2
(f)
V
+
1
(f)
(8)
x
z
y
Ground plane
NX=60 x ∆X
NY=24 x ∆Y
NZ=100 x ∆Z
Discontinuity
under
investigation
Dielectric substrate
ε
r H=1 mm
port2 port1
Figure 5. The conﬁguration and dimensions.
Typical results are pictured in Figure 6, together with the investigated structures. Here, 60 × 24 ×
100 FDTD space is used with ∆x = ∆y = ∆z = h/6, where h = w = 1 mm. The time step is chosen as
∆t = ∆x/(2c), where c is the velocity of light. Relative permittivity is ﬁxed toε
r
= 2.2. As observed in
these examples, a very good agreement has been obtained between the results of the packages.
FDTD ND = 20
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Frequency (GHz)
S

P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
d
B
)
S21
S11
ND
0 10 15 5 30 40 45 20 25 35
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Frequency (GHz)
S

P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
d
B
)
S21
S11
ND
0 10 15 5 30 40 45 20 25 35
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Frequency (GHz)
S

P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
d
B
)
S21
S11
ND
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 10 15 5 30 40 45
Frequency (GHz)
S

P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
d
B
)
S21
S11
ND
20 25 35
TML
Figure 6. S parameters vs. frequency obtained via MPATCH and TLMANT. (ND is the number of cells).
98
C¸ AKIR, SEVG
˙
I: Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch...,
After the calibration against the TLMANT package the MPATCH is compared with the results of
three diﬀerent problems from the literature; a linefed rectangular patch antenna [13], threeelement patch
coplanar parasitic microstrip antenna [14], and fourelement seriesfed patch array antenna [15]. These
structures are presented in Figure 7, together with the dimensions. The linefed rectangular patch is designed
to have a resonant frequency at 7.5 GHz, threeelement coplanar parasitic is 3.9 GHz and the third one is at
9.5 GHz. These patches are etched on a dielectric substrate. The length of the fedline from the source plane
to the edge of the antenna is 20 ∆z, and the reference plane for port 1 is 10 ∆z from the edge of the patch
for both of antennas. The 8cell PML is applied as the absorbing boundary condition. Other parameters of
the structures are given in Table 1.
2.45 cm
3.75 cm
0.25 cm
4.70 cm
2.55 cm 2.45 cm
0.25 cm
z
12.45 mm
16 mm
2.09
mm
2.46 mm
y
x
3.93 mm
2.36 cm
1.3 mm
1.008
cm
1.23 cm
1.179 cm
Figure 7. Structures from literature [1315] that are tested with MPATCH.
The spatial distribution of E
y
(x,y,z,t) just beneath the microstrip antennas at diﬀerent simulation
time instants are presented in Figure 8. Since pulse propagation under the microstrip is simulated propa
gating and discontinuityreﬂected pulses may be observed in the ﬁgure.
Table 1. The parameters of microstrip structures given in Figure 7.
Linefed single Threeelement Seriesfed
patch antenna patch antenna patch antenna
Thickness
(h) 0.8 mm 1.55 mm 1.574 mm
Space ∆ x = 0.492 mm ∆ x = 0.15 cm ∆ x = 0.433 mm
Steps ∆ y = 0.198 mm ∆ y = 0.038 cm ∆ y = 0.393 mm
∆ z = 0.8 mm ∆ z = 0.15 cm ∆ z = 0.504 mm
Total Size
NX = 60 NX = 89 NX = 63
NY = 20 NY = 20 NY = 20
NZ = 66 NZ = 76 NZ = 250
99
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.1, 2005
Figure 8. Ey on xzplane, (a) linefed rectangular patch, (b) 3element coplanar patch (c) seriesfed patch array.
Microstrip patch antenna is a oneport circuit and it has a scattering parameter of S
11
, or simply
the reﬂection coeﬃcient. The frequency variation of the input reﬂection coeﬃcient of the rectangular patch
antenna (i.e., the ﬁrst structure) is shown in Figure 9 (left). The operating resonance at 7.5 GHz is strongly
traced via both the MPATCH simulation package and in the measurement. Return loss vs. frequency of
the 3element microstrip patch antenna is also shown in the ﬁgure (right). The results with the literature
are in good agreement.
18
10
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
R
e
t
u
r
n
L
o
s
s
(
d
B
)
a
b
c
20 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
R
e
t
u
r
n
L
o
s
s
(
d
B
)
0 3 3.5 4 4.5
a
b
c
Frequency (GHz) Frequency (GHz)
Figure 9. (Left) Return loss vs. frequency, (a) MPATCH, (b) measurement [13], (c) FDTD [13]; (Right) Return
loss vs. frequency, (a) FDTD [14], (b) MPATCH, (c) measurement [14].
The seriesfed patch array is also manufactured and measured. Figure 10 shows the measurement setup
and input reﬂection vs. frequency. The scattering parameters are measured by using an HP 8510C network
analyzer. As presented in the ﬁgure, the MPATCH result is in good agreement with the measurements [16].
100
C¸ AKIR, SEVG
˙
I: Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch...,
9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 8.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
I
S
1
1
1
(
d
B
)
Frequency (GHz)
FDTD
Measurement
Figure 10. (Left) The measurement setup (HP 8510C Network Analyzer), (right) seriesfed microstrip array, and
return loss vs. frequency curves.
4. The 3×3 microstrip square patch array
The designed 3×3 array antenna is analyzed with the calibrated MPATCH package. First, return loss vs.
frequency of a square unit microstrip antenna is simulated and the result is given in Figure 11. As observed,
the resonance frequency of the single patch is around 1.8 GHz.
1.4
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
I
S
1
1
l
(
d
B
)
Frequency (GHz)
1 0.6 0.2 1.8 2.2 2.6 3
Figure 11. Return loss vs. frequency of a single patch (∆x = ∆y = 2.76 mm, ∆z = 0.25 mm, w = 20×∆, a =
18×∆, by = 5×∆, bx = 7×∆).
The radiation patterns of the 3×3 patch array are also simulated via MPATCH. Typical examples
are plotted in Figure 12, together with the coordinates and array location. The patterns belong to φ=0
◦
and φ=90
◦
cases and equiphase feedings. Nearly 34
◦
beamwidth is obtained with this 3×3 array.
101
Turk J Elec Engin, VOL.13, NO.1, 2005
x
x
φ
θ
y
E
H
φ
θ
20 15 10 5 0
θ=0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
φ=90°
240
270
300
330
20 15 10 5 0
θ=0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
φ=0°
240
270
300
330
Figure 12. Radiation patterns at 1.8 GHz, left: φ=0
◦
, right: φ = 90
◦
.
The position of the main beam can be moved or steered by introducing a phase shift (equivalently, a
delay in time) between elements. To point the beam direction towards a desired θdirection, ∆τ time delay
must be applied to the feeding pulses between the elements. The delay can be calculated as
∆τ =
d
c
( d
= d sin(θ) ). (9)
The 3×3 array elements are numbered from 1 to 9 and the delays of each element are calculated
according to classic beamforming approach [16]. Typical examples are given in Figure 13.
θ=0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
φ=30°
240
270
300
330
θ=0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
φ=10°
240
270
300
330
16 12 8 4 0 16 12 8 4 0
θ=0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
φ=20°
240
270
300
330
16 12 8 4 0
Figure 13. Beam forming with MPATCH, 1.8 GHz, xzplane, (solid: MPATCH, dashed: MPATCH plus analytical
array factor formulation, β: beam steering direction).
5. Conclusions
The design, simulation and experimentation of microstrip patch arrays with beamsteering capabilities are
discussed. A 3×3 square patch array is designed with approximately 35
◦
beamwidth and up to 60
◦
electronic
scanning capability. Initial design is done via an analytical approximate approach (i.e., the transmissionline
model), and then accurate characteristics are determined via numerical simulations. Finally, the parameters
of the designed array are measured.
An FDTD based simulation package MPATCH is prepared and calibrated against other powerful
simulators, as well as on canonical microstrip patch structures that are investigated in the literature. The
MPATCH package is then used in performance evaluation of the arrays designed for 1.8 GHz cellular wireless
102
C¸ AKIR, SEVG
˙
I: Design, Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch...,
communication systems. The MPACH package is designed to calculate network parameters which requires
near ﬁeld simulations, as well as to obtain radiation patterns which requires neartofarﬁeld transformation.
It is shown here that the package is very eﬀective in simulating microstrip patch structures.
References
[1] K.L. Wong, Design of Nonplanar Microstrip Antennas and Transmission Lines, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
1999.
[2] See for example http://www.kathrein.com, http://www.fractus.com
[3] K.S. Yee, “Numerical Solution of Initial Boundary Value Problems Involving Maxwell’s Equations in Isotropic
Media”, IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagat., AP14, pp. 302 – 307, 1966.
[4] Visit http://www.fdtd.org for both chronological and subject list of major applications
[5] K. Shlager, J. Schneider, “A Selective Survey of the FiniteDiﬀerence TimeDomain Literature”, IEEE Antennas
and Propagation Magazine, Vol.37, pp. 3956, 1995.
[6] M. Amman, “Design of Rectangular Microstrip Patch Antennas for the 2.4 GHz Band”, Applied Microwave &
Wireless, pp. 24  34, November/December 1997.
[7] M.O.
¨
Ozyal¸ cın, Modeling and Simulation of Electromagnetic Problems via Transmission Line Matrix Method,
Ph.D. Dissertation, Istanbul Technical University, Institute of Science, October 2002.
[8] A. Derneryd, “Linearly Polarized Microstrip Antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagat., AP24, pp. 846
 851, 1976.
[9] M. Schneider, “Microstrip Lines for Microwave
˙
Integrated Circuits”, Bell Syst. Tech. J., 48, pp.14211444,1969.
[10] E. Hammerstad, F.A. Bekkadal, Microstrip Handbook, ELAB Report, STF 44 A74169, University of Trondheim,
Norway, 1975.
[11] W.L. Stutzman, G.A. Thiele, Antenna Theory and design, John Wiley & Sons, 2
nd
Ed., New York, 1998.
[12] L. Sevgi, Complex Electromagnetic Problems and Numerical Simulation Approaches, IEEE Press – John Wiley
& Sons, Piscataway, New Jersey, 2003
[13] D.M. Sheen, S.M. Ali, M.D. Abouzahra, J.A. Kong, “Application of ThreeDimensional FiniteDiﬀerence Time
Domain Method to the Analysis of Planar Microstrip Circuits”, IEEE Trans. On Microwave Theo. and Tech.,
MTT38, no.7, pp.849856, 1990.
[14] L.M. Zimmerman, “Use of the FDTD Method in the Design of Microstrip Antenna Arrays”, Int. J. of Microwave
and Millimeter Wave Comp.aided Eng., Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 58  66, 1994.
[15] C.F. Wang, F. Ling, J.M. Jin, “A Fast FullWave Analysis of Scattering and Radiation from Large Finite Arrays
of Microstrip Antennas”, IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagat., AP46, pp. 14671474, no. 10, 1998.
[16] G. C¸akır, Gezgin
˙
Ileti¸sim Sistemleri
˙
I¸ cin H¨uzme Y¨ onlendirmeli Mikro¸serit Dizi Anten Tasarımı: Analitik
Hesaplama, Bilgisayar Benzetimleri Ve
¨
Ol¸cmeler, Doktora Tezi, Kocaeli
¨
Univ. Fen Bilimleri Enstit¨ us¨ u, Ocak,
2004.
103
(w/h ≥ 1) (2) Here. from electromagnetics to mechanics and the reader may reach hundreds of references for diﬀerent topics via a simple internet search (therefore no references are given in this article for their pioneering and characteristic applications).264 h (εe − 0.412h (εe + 0. VOL. as shown in Figure 1. Its characteristic parameters are the length L.8 GHz. The patch conductor can be assumed at any shape. and very eﬀective in visualisation [4. inhouse prepared MPATCH package. simulation and testing of microstrip patch array antenna for the current wireless communication systems which operates at 1.1. Here. the operating frequency. and the thickness h. as: L= 2f0 εe c √ − 2∆L (1) Where c is the velocity of light and ∆L = 0. Design Principles The designed antenna is a 3 ×3 array. the length L is slightly less than a half wavelength (in the dielectric). the calculations are based on the transmissionline model [7]. the ﬁnite element (FE) and method of moments (MoM). Here. and this simpliﬁes the analysis and performance prediction. Among the others are the ﬁnitediﬀerence time domain (FDTD). These beamwidths are chosen because they become almost standard for base station applications [2].258) w + 0. powerful numerical simulation methods are available which can be used to design complex microstrip structures. The antennas are analyzed with FDTDbased.Turk J Elec Engin. In practice. the width w . the halfwavelength rectangular patch element is chosen as the array element (as commonly used in microstrip antennas) [6].813 h . the width w of the radiating edge is speciﬁed ﬁrst. and beamwidth = 35 ◦ ) various analytical approximate approaches may be used. with 35 ◦ beamwidths. respectively. but generally simple geometries are used. This article describes the design. and the fringe factor. 94 . widely accepted. 2005 only the fundamentals. The FDTD [3] is chosen just because it is simple to implement. 2.8 GHZ band. NO. εe = εr + 1 εr − 1 + 2 2 1 1 + 12h/L .13. Fortunately. up to 60 ◦ electronic scanning capabilities. Although not critical. The length may also be speciﬁed by calculating the halfwavelength value and then subtracting a small length to take into account the fringing ﬁelds [810].3) w + 0. To meet the initial design requirements (operating frequency = 1. the transmission line matrix (TLM). ∆ L are eﬀective relative permittivity. The ﬁrst step in the design is to specify the dimensions of a single microstrip patch antenna.5]. All of these methods have continuously been applied to broad range of physical problems. The squarepatch geometry is chosen since it can be arranged to produce circularly polarized waves. εe and f o.
The 3 × 3 patch array that operates at 1. and is the total array length.758 cm Figure 2. SEVGI: Design. The total array length is found to be ∼ 23 cm for the 35 ◦ beamwidth.2 a = 2. the dimensions of the squareshaped microstrip patch antenna element are speciﬁed as shown in Figure 2..758 cm h Figure 3.. A rectangular patch antenna. Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch. the beamwidth is given by [11]. = PML8 w w = 5. From these approximate calculations. ¸ Metallic patch L w h Ground plane Figure 1. 95 . − cos−1 sin(θ0 ) + 0.. The square patch element and the dimensions. λ0 λ0 θ3dB = cos−1 sin(θ0 ) − 0.443. λ0 is the freespace wavelength.˙ CAKIR. (3) where θ0 is the main beam pointing angle. The 3x3 patch array is pictured in Figure 3.8 GHz.2 a = 2. When the interelement distance is selected to be halfwavelength the 3×3 array satisﬁes 35 ◦ beamwidth on both planes normal to the patch surface.52 cm a by bx y a x w h = 1mm εr = 2.516 cm h = 1 mm εr = 2. a w w w = 5.443. For a linear array with a uniform excitation. and with 35 ◦ beamwidth.
Figure 4. isotropic and nondispersive medium are ∂B ∂t ∂D +J ∂t ×E =− . charge density permittivity permeability conductivity 96 . its Calibration and Canonical Comparisons The FDTD (ﬁnite diﬀerence time domain) technique developed by K. NO. 2005 3. . ×H = (4) . which is called as leapfrog computation. ﬂux density . Locations of three neighbouring Yee cells in 3D. The three dimensional (3D) FDTD Yee cell is shown in Figure 4.S. VOL.D = ρ where D = εE and B = µH . Beside the spatial diﬀerences in ﬁeld components. Both time and spatial partial derivatives are handled with ﬁnite central diﬀerence approximation and the solution is obtained with a marching scheme in iterative form. MPATCH Package. E [V/m] H [A/m] D [q/m2] B [Wb/m2] : : : : electric ﬁeld magnetic ﬁeld el. and put them into iterative forms. there is also a half time step diﬀerence between electric and magnetic ﬁeld components.13. Here. The diﬀerential time domain Maxwell equations in a linear.B = 0 (5) J [A/m2] ρ [q/m3] ε [F/m] µ [H/m] σ [S/m] : : : : : the current density vol.1.Turk J Elec Engin. displacement vector mag. discretizes the two Maxwell curl equations directly in time and spatial domains. conductivity and permeability. and three electric and three magnetic ﬁeld components are calculated at diﬀerent locations of each cell. The characteristics of the medium are deﬁned by three parameters. but nonorthogonal in general) cells. permittivity. The physical geometry is divided into small (mostly rectangular or cubical. Yee [3].
and t=∆ t/2. where ∆tis the time step size). y. SEVGI: Design. y and z directions. j. 3 ∆ t. except ε. . 2 ∆ t. The spatial steps ∆ x. The FDTD computation volume in the MPATCH is terminated by PML (perfectly matched layer) (very often 610 cell length) blocks which simulates freespace eﬀectively. k are used to mention number of cells from the origin in x . e. two of the iterative FDTD equations are n ˜ n ˜ Hx (i.. For a lossy and sourcefree region.. j. First. 5 ∆ t/2. ˜ Numerical simulations used to investigate the designed patch arrays are performed via the MPATCH package that is based on the FDTD method. . z ) directions.. t2 =2∆ t. j. ¸ All the parameters are vector quantities. k) + ∆t n E n (i. k) = Hx −1 (i. Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch. j. k) 2ε + σ∆t y 2∆t ˜ n ˜ H n (i. electric and magnetic ﬁelds are calculated at time instants t=∆ t. j. j. a neartofarﬁeld (NTFF) transformation module is added to handle farﬁeld projections. j. which are necessary in antenna radiation pattern simulations. Sample microstrip structures are used during these tests and scattering (S) parameters are calculated via both packages. k − 1) + (2ε + σ∆t)∆z x (7) Here. k − 1) µ0 ∆z y ∆t n [E n (i. ∆ x. . where t1 =∆ t. j. j − 1. with a chosen time step ∆ t. This is all the information needed for linear isotropic materials to completely specify the ﬁeld behaviour over time so long as the initial ﬁeld distribution is speciﬁed and satisﬁes the Maxwell’s equations. respectively.g. observe and store y component of the voltage at port 1 for an inﬁnite microstrip line (without structure). k)] − µ0 ∆y z (6) n Ey (i. ∆ y and ∆ z are the spatial steps (cell dimensions) in (x.. j. Besides. σ . ∆ y and ∆ z may be either taken as equal (Yee cube) or diﬀerent (Yee rectangular prism). k) − Ey (i.12]. A half timestep diﬀerence between electric and magnetic ﬁelds is denoted by n = n + 1/2 . One FDTD Yee cell occupies a ∆ x ×∆ y×∆ z volume... . Also. . respectively. Three electric and three magnetic ﬁeld components are calculated at diﬀerent locations within the reference cell in such a way so as to minimize the computational eﬀort after the discretization of two curl equations by using centraldiﬀerence approach (or by taking up the second order terms in their Taylor’s expansion). j. k) − (2ε + σ∆t)∆x z 2∆t ˜ n ˜ H n (i. which is based on the transmission line matrix method. j. j. . 3 ∆ t/2. The Sparameters in frequency domain is obtained from time domain simulation data as follows (see ﬁgure 5): Assume the microstrip structure as a two port device (with port 1 and 2)... Everything inside this cell is assumed to be constant. k) − Hx (i. which is called as leapfrog computation (i.e. The integers i. 97 . Using the Taylor’s expansion and discretizing partial derivatives directly in time and spatial domain yield the wellknown FDTD iterative equation. there is also a half time step diﬀerence between electric and magnetic ﬁeld components. Calculations are performed at distinct instants t1 . t2 .. k) = 2ε − σ∆t n−1 E (i. The integer n is used to denote a number of time steps since the iterations starts. . respectively.. The MPATCH package is ﬁrst calibrated against another powerful time domain simulator TLMANT [7. . k) − Ez (i. ρ and µ. t3 =3∆ t. this yields the incident voltage. . t3 .˙ CAKIR. k) − Hz (i − 1. V1+ (t). .
Here. (ND is the number of cells). NO. and V2− (t). (reﬂected ﬁeld) at port 2.Turk J Elec Engin. As observed in these examples. which yields V1t (t) (total ﬁeld) at port 1.1. Relative permittivity is ﬁxed toεr = 2. frequency obtained via MPATCH and TLMANT. S parameters vs. V1+ (f) V1+ (f) V2− (f) V1+ (f) S11 (f) = S21 (f) = (8) NY=24 x ∆Y port1 NZ=100 x ∆Z port2 Discontinuity under investigation NX=60 x ∆X y εr z x Ground plane Dielectric substrate H=1 mm Figure 5. 2005 Then. FDTD 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 S11 SParameters (dB) S21 TML 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 ND = 20 S21 S11 ND SParameters (dB) ND 0 10 20 30 40 Frequency (GHz) S21 50 60 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Frequency (GHz) 35 40 45 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 S11 ND 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Frequency (GHz) 35 40 45 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 S21 SParameters (dB) SParameters (dB) S11 ND 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Frequency (GHz) 35 40 45 Figure 6. 98 . The time step is chosen as ∆ t = ∆ x/(2c). The conﬁguration and dimensions.13. a very good agreement has been obtained between the results of the packages. together with the investigated structures. 60 × 24 × 100 FDTD space is used with ∆ x = ∆ y = ∆ z = h/6. Take the Fourier transforms of all and calculate S11 and S21 from V t (f) − V1+ (f) V1− (f) = 1 . where h = w = 1 mm. VOL. where c is the velocity of light.2 . Typical results are pictured in Figure 6. repeat the same observation (with the structure) at both ports.
The 8cell PML is applied as the absorbing boundary condition. The parameters of microstrip structures given in Figure 7.25 cm 1. threeelement coplanar parasitic is 3.45 cm 1. Since pulse propagation under the microstrip is simulated propagating and discontinuityreﬂected pulses may be observed in the ﬁgure.y.8 mm ∆ x = 0. The length of the fedline from the source plane to the edge of the antenna is 20 ∆ z.492 mm ∆ y = 0.5 GHz.15 cm ∆ y = 0. ¸ After the calibration against the TLMANT package the MPATCH is compared with the results of three diﬀerent problems from the literature..008 cm 1.55 mm ∆ x = 0. and the reference plane for port 1 is 10 ∆ z from the edge of the patch for both of antennas. These patches are etched on a dielectric substrate.25 cm 4. Structures from literature [1315] that are tested with MPATCH.75 cm 2. Linefed single patch antenna Thickness (h) Space Steps 0.45 cm 2.5 GHz.. threeelement patch coplanar parasitic microstrip antenna [14].23 cm 0.504 mm NX = 63 NY = 20 NZ = 250 99 Total Size . The linefed rectangular patch is designed to have a resonant frequency at 7.3 mm z 16 mm 2.8 mm NX = 60 NY = 20 NZ = 66 Threeelement patch antenna 1.09 mm y 2.70 cm 12.198 mm ∆ z = 0.z. a linefed rectangular patch antenna [13]. Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch.9 GHz and the third one is at 9.433 mm ∆ y = 0.45 mm 0.179 cm 1.15 cm NX = 89 NY = 20 NZ = 76 Seriesfed patch antenna 1.˙ CAKIR. The spatial distribution of Ey (x.46 mm x 2.93 mm Figure 7.55 cm 2. and fourelement seriesfed patch array antenna [15]. These structures are presented in Figure 7. Other parameters of the structures are given in Table 1.574 mm ∆ x = 0.. Table 1.t) just beneath the microstrip antennas at diﬀerent simulation time instants are presented in Figure 8.038 cm ∆ z = 0.393 mm ∆ z = 0. SEVGI: Design. together with the dimensions. 3.36 cm 3.
NO. The seriesfed patch array is also manufactured and measured. (a) MPATCH.5 Return Loss (dB) a b c Figure 9. frequency. (a) linefed rectangular patch. (b) measurement [13]. The scattering parameters are measured by using an HP 8510C network analyzer. frequency of the 3element microstrip patch antenna is also shown in the ﬁgure (right).Turk J Elec Engin. (c) measurement [14].13. frequency. (b) MPATCH. 100 . (Right) Return loss vs. Ey on xzplane. 2005 Figure 8. Return loss vs. Figure 10 shows the measurement setup and input reﬂection vs. (Left) Return loss vs. the ﬁrst structure) is shown in Figure 9 (left). As presented in the ﬁgure. (a) FDTD [14].5 Frequency (GHz) 4 a b c 4. or simply the reﬂection coeﬃcient.1. The frequency variation of the input reﬂection coeﬃcient of the rectangular patch antenna (i.e. (b) 3element coplanar patch (c) seriesfed patch array. the MPATCH result is in good agreement with the measurements [16]. The operating resonance at 7. VOL. The results with the literature are in good agreement. frequency.5 GHz is strongly traced via both the MPATCH simulation package and in the measurement.. Microstrip patch antenna is a oneport circuit and it has a scattering parameter of S 11 . (c) FDTD [13]. 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 0 5 Return Loss (dB) 10 15 20 25 30 35 2 4 6 8 10 12 Frequency (GHz) 14 16 18 20 40 0 3 3.
.8 GHz.5 11 11.6 3 Frequency (GHz) Figure 11. Typical examples are plotted in Figure 12.5 10 10. First. The 3×3 microstrip square patch array The designed 3 ×3 array antenna is analyzed with the calibrated MPATCH package. ¸ 0 5 10 IS111 (dB) 15 20 25 30 35 40 8. 4. The radiation patterns of the 3×3 patch array are also simulated via MPATCH. return loss vs. frequency of a square unit microstrip antenna is simulated and the result is given in Figure 11. a = 18 ×∆ . Return loss vs. As observed. 2 0 2 IS11l (dB) 4 6 8 10 12 14 0. b x = 7 ×∆ ). Nearly 34 ◦ beamwidth is obtained with this 3×3 array. frequency of a single patch ( ∆ x = ∆ y = 2. frequency curves. (right) seriesfed microstrip array.5 FDTD Measurement 9 9.2 0.8 2. w = 20 ×∆ .2 2.. together with the coordinates and array location..5 Frequency (GHz) Figure 10. ∆ z = 0. Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch.25 mm. 101 .76 mm.˙ CAKIR.4 1. the resonance frequency of the single patch is around 1. (Left) The measurement setup (HP 8510C Network Analyzer). and return loss vs. SEVGI: Design. b y = 5 ×∆ .6 1 1. The patterns belong to φ =0 ◦ and φ =90 ◦ cases and equiphase feedings.
as well as on canonical microstrip patch structures that are investigated in the literature. (solid: MPATCH. β : beam steering direction).e. ∆τ time delay must be applied to the feeding pulses between the elements.13. xzplane.Turk J Elec Engin. Initial design is done via an analytical approximate approach (i. The delay can be calculated as d c ∆τ = ( d = d sin(θ) ). a delay in time) between elements. Finally. The MPATCH package is then used in performance evaluation of the arrays designed for 1. the parameters of the designed array are measured. 2005 θ=0 x Eφ θ Hθ y 240 φ x φ=0° 210 150 180 φ=90° 210 150 180 120 240 120 270 20 15 10 5 0 90 270 20 15 10 5 0 90 300 330 θ=0 330 60 300 30 30 60 Figure 12. An FDTD based simulation package MPATCH is prepared and calibrated against other powerful simulators. Typical examples are given in Figure 13. right: φ = 90◦ . θ=0 330 300 θ=0 330 60 300 θ=0 330 60 300 30 30 30 60 270 240 φ=10° 210 16 12 8 4 0 90 120 150 180 270 240 φ=20° 210 16 12 8 4 0 90 120 150 180 270 240 φ=30° 210 16 12 8 4 0 90 120 150 180 Figure 13. the transmissionline model). and then accurate characteristics are determined via numerical simulations. Conclusions The design. The position of the main beam can be moved or steered by introducing a phase shift (equivalently. A 3 ×3 square patch array is designed with approximately 35 ◦ beamwidth and up to 60 ◦ electronic scanning capability.8 GHz. 5. simulation and experimentation of microstrip patch arrays with beamsteering capabilities are discussed. To point the beam direction towards a desired θ direction. VOL. Beam forming with MPATCH. Radiation patterns at 1.8 GHz. 1. left: φ =0 ◦ . dashed: MPATCH plus analytical array factor formulation. (9) The 3 ×3 array elements are numbered from 1 to 9 and the delays of each element are calculated according to classic beamforming approach [16]. NO.1..8 GHz cellular wireless 102 .
24 . Bekkadal. 14671474. Hammerstad. Simulation and Tests of a Lowcost Microstrip Patch. Bilgisayar Benzetimleri Ve Ol¸meler. J.... Ali. pp. as well as to obtain radiation patterns which requires neartofarﬁeld transformation. 846 . Jin. pp. G. http://www. 1990.fdtd..851. AP24. Doktora Tezi. [2] See for example http://www. October 2002.849856. S. IEEE Trans. no.A. pp. Derneryd.D. no. SEVGI: Design. Abouzahra. Design of Nonplanar Microstrip Antennas and Transmission Lines. uu 2004. Schneider.34.4 GHz Band”. “Numerical Solution of Initial Boundary Value Problems Involving Maxwell’s Equations in Isotropic Media”. IEEE Trans. Ling. 48. 1976. 1975. [4] Visit http://www. “Design of Rectangular Microstrip Patch Antennas for the 2..M. Gezgin Ileti¸im Sistemleri I¸in H¨ zme Y¨nlendirmeli Mikro¸erit Dizi Anten Tasarımı: Analitik ¸ u o s ¨c ¨ Hesaplama. University of Trondheim. Thiele. IEEE Trans. ¸ communication systems. and Tech. Sevgi. of Microwave and Millimeter Wave Comp. J. [10] E. pp.1969. Vol.M. 1966.F.L. 58 . [11] W.com. “Microstrip Lines for Microwave Integrated Circuits”.14211444.S. It is shown here that the package is very eﬀective in simulating microstrip patch structures. References [1] K. 302 – 307. AP46. ELAB Report..66. “Linearly Polarized Microstrip Antennas. Vol. 2003 [13] D. no. Applied Microwave & Wireless. “Application of ThreeDimensional FiniteDiﬀerence TimeDomain Method to the Analysis of Planar Microstrip Circuits”. pp. New York.. Int. [15] C. On Microwave Theo. Institute of Science. ˙ [9] M. J.7. Wang. pp. Bell Syst. Wong..com [3] K. 4. Antenna Theory and design. 2 nd Ed. Stutzman. 103 .M. Ocak.org for both chronological and subject list of major applications [5] K. F. ˙ s ˙c [16] G. Antennas and Propagat. John Wiley & Sons.aided Eng. Ozyal¸ın.D. “A Fast FullWave Analysis of Scattering and Radiation from Large Finite Arrays of Microstrip Antennas”.. J. Norway. Kong. Sheen.. Shlager. 1. Piscataway. Fen Bilimleri Enstit¨s¨. New Jersey.37. F. Complex Electromagnetic Problems and Numerical Simulation Approaches. Istanbul Technical University. Tech. 1994. New York. The MPACH package is designed to calculate network parameters which requires near ﬁeld simulations. 3956. John Wiley & Sons. Zimmerman.˙ CAKIR. Amman. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine. 10. pp.O.fractus. c Ph. Antennas and Propagat. STF 44 A74169. pp. Modeling and Simulation of Electromagnetic Problems via Transmission Line Matrix Method. “Use of the FDTD Method in the Design of Microstrip Antenna Arrays”.A. 1998. Yee. [14] L.M. [12] L. Kocaeli Univ. 1995. [8] A. November/December 1997. 1998. Schneider. MTT38. Microstrip Handbook.A. Cakır.kathrein. Antennas and Propagat. IEEE Press – John Wiley & Sons. 1999. M. Dissertation. ¨ [7] M. [6] M. J.” IEEE Trans.L. “A Selective Survey of the FiniteDiﬀerence TimeDomain Literature”. AP14.