Characterization of the Input Impedance of the

Inset-Fed Rectangular Microstrip Antenna

Ying Hu
David R. Jackson
Jeffery T. Williams
Stuart A. Long
Varada Rajan Komanduri

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

University of Houston
Houston, TX 77204-4005, USA

ABSTRACT

The input impedance and radiation pattern of the inset-fed rectangular microstrip patch
antenna are investigated. It is concluded that a shifted cosine-squared function describes
well the variation of the resonant input resistance with the feed location (point of contact
between the microstrip feed line and the notch) for a given patch and substrate geometry.
The parameters of the shifted cosine-squared function depend on the notch width, for a
given patch and substrate geometry. The cross-polarization level is seen to increase as
either the notch width or depth increases. However, for a fixed input resistance level, the
notch depth decreases as the width increases, so that the cross-polarization level is not
very sensitive to the notch width for a fixed input resistance.

Keywords: Inset-feed, rectangular patch, microstrip antenna

1
I. Introduction

The location of the contact between a feeding transmission line and a microstrip patch

antenna is commonly used for impedance control. The inset-feed technique integrates a

patch antenna together with a microstrip feed on a single planar substrate. The input

impedance of the inset-fed patch varies, similarly to the coaxial probe-fed patch, as the

inset-depth of the feed line changes.

For a coaxial probe-fed rectangular patch antenna shown in Fig. 1(a), customary analysis

methods use a transmission line model or a cavity model to calculate the input impedance

[1]-[9]. More rigorous numerical approaches, such as the method of moments are also

commonly used [10]. Calculations show that the resonant input resistance of the probe-

fed rectangular patch decreases as the feed approaches the center of the patch, and as the

width of the patch increases [10]. Furthermore, the dependence of the resonant input-

resistance on the location of the probe feed is characterized accurately by a cosine-

squared function,

"!x #
Rin = A cos 2 $ n % (1)
& 2 '

where xn = 2 x / L (see Fig. 1(a)). The cosine-squared formula has been confirmed by

both theoretical [1]-[10] and experimental [11] results.

The impedance behavior of the inset-fed rectangular patch shown in Fig. 1(b) has not

been systematically investigated to the same extent as the probe-fed patch, although the

same cosine-squared function is often used to design such patch geometries. Some earlier

2
measurements pointed out that the dependence of the input resistance on feed position

differed between probe-fed and inset-fed patches. In particular, the experiments

demonstrated that the input impedance of an inset-fed patch dropped more rapidly than a

cosine-squared function as the feed position moves away from the edge of the patch [11-

13].

The purpose of this paper is to more fully explore and characterize the behavior of the

resonant input resistance. A simple CAD formula is proposed to characterize this

resonant input resistance, which takes the form of a “shifted” cosine-squared function.

The effects of the inset-feed on the radiation pattern are also considered, and a study of

the cross-polarization is made.

II. CAD Formula for Resonant Input Resistance

Simulations were performed on inset-fed patches with varying substrate thicknesses h,

notch widths S, line widths Wf, and inset depths xf. The input impedance was obtained by

de-embedding the calculated input impedance at the end of the microstrip line (M-M in

Fig. 1(b)) to the contact point between the feed line and the radiating patch (C-C in Fig.

1(b)). The resonance frequency was chosen as the frequency that maximized the input

resistance at the contact point (therefore there will be a small input reactance at the

resonance frequency). In the de-embedding procedure, an isolated microstrip line was

used inside the notch region. That is, the interaction between the feed line and the

surrounding patch in the notch region was assumed to be negligible, so that the feed line

within the notch region acts as an isolated microstrip transmission line. This assumption

3
was verified for the gap widths assumed here (results are omitted), where the ratio of slot

width S to the line width Wf was greater than or equal to 2. (Even for those situations

where the gap width is small enough so that line-patch interactions are not negligible, one

may still assume an isolated microstrip line in the de-embedding procedure as a way to

artificially define the input impedance at the contact point, though the impedance so

defined will no longer approximately agree with that measured by directly feeding the

patch at the contact point with a probe feed.)

It was observed that the inset feed causes the voltage minimum to shift away from the

center of the patch (the location predicted by Eq. (1) for the probe-fed patch), and move

towards the edge of the patch. Another observed effect of the inset feed is that the slope

of the curve describing the voltage versus feed position is no longer zero at the edge of

the patch, as predicted by Eq. (1). It was found that both effects are captured to a fair

degree of accuracy by simply “shifting” the argument of the cosine-squared formula of

Eq. (1). The proposed formula is

"! #
Rin = A cos 2 % (xn $ B )& . (2)
'2 (

In general, the coefficients A and B depend on the notch width S, the aspect ratio W/L of

the patch, and the substrate permittivity εr and thickness h. The coefficients are

approximately independent of the line width Wf. In the next section results will be given

to verify the accuracy of Eq. (2), and values for the coefficients A and B will be given for

varying substrate εr and h, for a commonly used patch aspect ratio W/L = 1.5.

4
III. Results for Input Resistance

Three patch geometries with different dielectric substrates are studied to characterize the

inset-fed patch. Table 1 records the width and length of the patch for each substrate.

These dimensions are scaled to produce a common resonant frequency of about 2.3 GHz

(the exact resonance frequency depends on the notch dimensions). The substrate

thickness h is 0.127 cm for each case.

Figure 2 first validates the simulation for the inset-fed patch by comparing results for the

de-embedded resonant input resistance at the contact point from two simulation packages

(Ansoft HFSSTM, which uses a finite element analysis, and Ansoft Designer®, which is

based on the method of moments) with experimental measurements [11] on the patch

with εr = 2.42. For this result S = 1.14 cm and Wf = 0.38 cm (corresponding to Z0 = 50 Ω).

(In all simulations the conductivity of the copper patch and ground plane was taken as 5.8

× 107 S/m while the loss tangent of the substrate was neglected.) The resonant input

resistance is determined for each notch depth by finding the frequency at which the de-

embedded resistance at the contact point is a maximum. (This frequency varied slightly

as a function of the notch depth.) The de-embedded input impedance at the contact point

is slightly inductive due to the fact that the line/patch junction has some inductance

associated with it (just as a probe feed does).

Results (omitted) were then obtained for varying line widths. For the air-filled patch

results were obtained using lines that have characteristic impedances of 50 Ω and 100 Ω.

For the patch with εr = 2.42, results were obtained using feed lines that have

5
characteristic impedances of 50 Ω and 25 Ω. It was observed that the de-embedded input

impedances were approximately independent of the line width (impedance).

Given that the line width does not significantly affect the resonant input resistance, a

standard 50 Ω line is used to feed an inset-fed patch with εr = 2.42 and different notch

widths. Figure 3 shows the Rin vs. xn curve for each notch width, along with the results of

CAD formula (2). The coefficients A and B were determined by a least-squares fitting

procedure (details omitted). It is seen that the CAD formula predicts the resonant input

resistance fairly well. The agreement is also observed to hold for different substrate

permittivities (results are omitted for brevity).

Table 2 summarizes the values of the coefficients A and B for the three different

permittivities indicated in Table 1, where all of the patches have the same substrate

thickness of 0.127 cm and the same (typical) aspect ratio of 1.5 (see Table 1), and all are

fed by a 50 Ω feed line. The parameters A and B are observed to depend on the substrate

permittivity.

Table 3 shows values for the coefficients A and B for the three permittivities used

previously (1.0, 2.42, and 10.2), for two different substrate thicknesses (the one used in

Table 2 as well as one that is twice as thick, h = 0.254 cm), for a fixed ratio of notch

width to line width of 3 (the value used most commonly in the literature). The line widths

were chosen to be the same as that for the S/Wf = 3 case in Table 2, corresponding to a 50

Ω feed line for the thinner substrate. Note that this corresponds to using a different notch

6
width for each different permittivity. For the thicker substrate the impedance of the feed

lines is higher than 50 Ω, but the de-embedded input resistance is essentially independent

of the line width, as noted previously. The patch dimensions are the same for both

substrate thicknesses, and are given by Table 1. It is observed from Table 3 that the

coefficients do depend on the substrate thickness to some extent. For the high permittivity

case (εr = 10.2) it was observed that when the substrate thickness was doubled the CAD

formula was significantly less accurate than in all of the other cases, presumably due to

the stronger interaction between the line and the notch, attributable to the narrower notch

in the high permittivity case, and the greater spread of the fringing fields, due to the

thicker substrate. Hence, results for this case are omitted in Table 3. The results show that

the A coefficient increases with increasing substrate permittivity, while the trend for the B

coefficient is less clear.

Table 4 shows values for the coefficients A and B for four permittivities: the three used

previously in Table 2, along with εr = 6.15. The substrate thickness is the same as for the

thicker substrate used in Table 3 (h = 0.254 cm). For this set of results a fixed notch

width of 1.14 cm was used (which is the same notch width used for the εr = 2.42 case in

Table 2). The line widths were again chosen to be the same as that for the S/Wf = 3 case

in Table 2, corresponding to a 50 Ω feed line for the thinner substrate. For the εr = 6.15

case the line width was 0.187 cm. The patch dimensions are again the same for both

substrate thicknesses, and are given by Table 1 for the low, medium, and high

permittivities. For the εr = 6.15 case the patch dimensions are W = 3.90 cm and L = 2.55

cm. The ratio of notch width to line width now varies from about 2 for the air substrate

7
case to about 9 for the εr = 10.2 case. In all cases the notch width is wide enough so that

there is little interaction between the line and the notch, even for this thicker substrate

case. These results show that the A coefficient again increases as the substrate

permittivity increases. The trend with the B coefficient is again not completely clear, but

for this case of a fixed notch width it remains approximately constant as the substrate

permittivity increases.

Figure 4 shows a comparison between the exact resonant input resistance and the results

from CAD formula (2) for the three permittivities εr = 1.0, 2.42, and 10.2, for the thicker

substrate case (h = 0.254 cm) in Table 4. For each permittivity, the CAD formula uses the

coefficients A and B from Table 4. The agreement is seen to be very good, although there

is a noticeable error when the contact point is near the edge of the patch for the high

permittivity case.

IV. Radiation Patterns

Figure 3 shows that for a particular input resistance, a wider notch requires a shallower

inset depth. Increasing either the notch width or depth results in a greater disturbance of

the patch currents relative to that of the rectangular patch, increasing the cross-

polarization in the H plane (there will be no cross polarization in the E plane regardless of

the notch dimensions, due to symmetry). In a previous work, piecewise sinusoidal basis

pulse functions were used in the vicinity of the contact point between a semi-infinite

microstrip line and the patch surface for an inset-fed patch [14]. A large current

8
fluctuation was found at the contact point [15], which would be expected to result in

cross-polarization.

In this paper, the effects of the notch width and depth on the radiation pattern are

investigated. First, simulations are performed for a fixed notch depth and a changing

notch width, and then for a fixed notch width and changing notch depth. For this study,

the patch has a substrate dielectric constant of 2.42. Figures 5 (a) and (b) show the notch

width and depth effects, respectively. As expected, the cross-polarization level increases

as the notch gets wider or deeper. However, for a fixed input resistance level, the

competing factors of notch width and depth compensate to maintain a somewhat constant

cross-polarization level. At xn = 0.875, the cross-pol level in Figure 5(a) exceeds the co-

pol level. This corresponds to the feed point where Rin approaches zero in Figure 3. At

this point the patch essentially loses its main resonance and performs very poorly.

A patch with a substrate dielectric constant of 2.42 with three different notch widths, S =

0.76 cm, 1.14 cm, and 1.52 cm, was then constructed in HFSSTM. A 50 Ω line fed all

patches. The notch depth was tailored to match the patch to the line impedance for each

notch width. The patch with the narrowest notch width was found to have the smallest

cross-polarization, although the cross polarization was not very sensitive to the notch

width, due to the competing effects of notch width and depth mentioned previously.

9
V. Conclusions

The input impedance behavior of the inset-fed rectangular microstrip patch antenna has

been investigated. The de-embedded resonant input resistance of the patch at the contact

point between the line and the patch versus the notch depth (location of the contact point)

was found to be well-characterized by a simple shifted cosine-squared function. The two

parameters (A and B) appearing in this simple CAD formula are approximately

independent of the width of the microstrip feed line. However, they depend on the

substrate permittivity and thickness, as well as the notch width and the aspect ratio of the

patch. Tables were presented to give the values of these coefficients for a commonly used

aspect ratio W/L = 1.5 and the most commonly used ratio of notch width to line width of

S/Wf = 3, for three different permittivities and two different substrate thicknesses.

The radiation pattern of the inset-fed patch was also studied with the main focus on its

cross-polarization level in the H-plane. Increasing either the notch width or depth

increases the cross-polarization level. However, for a fixed input resistance, an increase

in the notch width requires a decrease in the notch depth. Therefore, for a fixed input

resistance, the cross-polarization level is not very sensitive to the notch width.

References

[1] J. R. James, P. S. Hall, and C. Wood, Microstrip Antenna Theory and Design, Peter

Peregrinus, IEE Electromagnetic Wave Series, vol. 12, 1981.

[2] J. R. James and P. S. Hall, The Handbook of Microstrip Antennas (two volume set),

Peregrinus, IEE Electromagnetic Wave Series, vol. 28, 1989.

10
[3] D. M. Pozar and D. H. Schaubert, Editors, Microstrip Antennas: The Analysis and

Design of Microstrip Antennas and Arrays, Wiley/IEEE Press, 1995.

[4] P. Bhartia, Millimeter-Wave Microstrip and Printed Circuit Antennas, Artech House,

1991.

[5] K. F. Lee, Editor, Advances in Microstrip and Printed Antennas, John Wiley, 1997.

[6] R. Garg, P. Bhartia, I. J. Bahl, and A. Ittipiboon, Editors, Microstrip Antenna Design

Handbook, Artech House, 2001.

[7] R. B. Waterhouse, Microstrip Patch Antennas: A Designer’s Guide, Kluwer

Academic Publishers, 2003.

[8] R. Bancroft, Microstrip and Printed Antenna Design, Noble Publishers, 2004.

[9] C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design, 3rd Ed., Wiley, 2005 (pp.727-

752).

[10] D. M. Pozar, “Input impedance and mutual coupling of rectangular microstrip

antennas”, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., Vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1191 – 1196, Nov.

1982.

[11] L. I. Basilio, M. A. Khayat, J. T. Williams, and S. A. Long, “The dependence of the

input impedance on feed position of probe and microstrip line-fed patch antennas”,

IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 49, pp. 45-47, Jan., 2001.

[12] R. Zhong, X. Tang, L. Wang, and X. Zhang, “Study of microstrip-line inset-fed and

two-layer electromagnetically coupled rectangular patch antennas”, Proc. 2005 Asia

Pacific Microwave Conference (APMC), vol. 4, pp. 4-7, Dec. 2005.

11
[13] T. Samaras, A. Kouloglou, J. N. Sahalos, “A note on the impedance variation with

feed position of a rectangular microstrip-patch antenna,” IEEE Trans. Antennas

Propag., vol. 46, pp. 90-92, April 2004.

[14] G. Ghione and C. Naldi, “Parameters of coplanar waveguides with lower ground

plane,” Electron. Lett., vol. 19, no. 18, Sept. 1983.

[15] S-C Wu, N. G. Alexopoulos, and O. Fordham, “Feeding structure contribution to

radiation by patch antennas with rectangular boundaries”, IEEE Trans. Antennas

Propag., vol. 40, pp. 1245-1249, Oct. 1992.

12
List of Tables

Table 1. Dimensions of inset-fed patch geometries, with h = 0.127 cm.

Table 2. A and B coefficients for common inset-fed patch geometries with various

dielectric substrates (εr = 1.00, 2.42 and 10.2) and a 50Ω feed line. The units of A are

Ohms and the units of B are radians.

Table 3. A and B coefficients for common inset-fed patch geometries with three different

dielectric substrates (εr = 1.00, 2.42, and 10.2) and S/Wf = 3. The patch geometry is given

in Table 1 and the feed line has the width shown in Table 2. Results are shown for h =

0.127 cm (left value) and h = 0.254 cm (right value). The units of A are Ohms and the

units of B are radians.

Table 4. A and B coefficients for inset-fed patch geometries with various dielectric

substrates (εr = 1.00, 2.42, 6.15, and 10.2) and S = 1.14 cm. The patch geometry is given

in Table 1 for εr = 1.00, 2.42, and 10.2. For εr = 6.15 the dimensions are W = 3.90 cm and

L = 2.55 cm. The feed line has the width shown in Table 2 for εr = 1.00, 2.42, and 10.2.

For εr = 6.15 the width of the feed line is 0.187 cm. The substrate thickness is h = 0.254

cm. The units of A are Ohms and the units of B are radians.

13
List of Figures

Figure 1. (a). Coaxial probe-fed rectangular patch. (b) Inset-fed rectangular patch.

Figure 2. Simulation results versus measurements (from [11]) on an inset-fed patch. εr =

2.42, S = 1.14 cm, Wf = 0.38 cm (a Z0 = 50Ω microstrip line), substrate thickness h =

0.127 cm.

Figure 3. The de-embedded resonant input resistance versus the normalized feed position,

for an inset-fed patch with three different notch widths. εr = 2.42, Wf = 0.38 cm. Results

are obtained from a moment-method simulation, using Ansoft Designer®. The discrete

data points are the results from the moment-method simulation, and the solid curves are

the results from the proposed CAD formula, using the values of A and B in Table 2.

Figure 4. The de-embedded resonant input resistance versus the normalized feed position,

for an inset-fed patch with S/Wf = 3. The values of the line width Wf are shown in Table

2. The substrate permittivity is εr = 2.42 and substrate thickness is h = 0.254 cm. The

patch dimensions are those shown in Table 1. Results are obtained from a moment-

method simulation, using Ansoft Designer®. The discrete data points are the results from

the moment-method simulation, and the curves are the results from the proposed CAD

formula, using the values of A and B in Table 3.

Figure 5. Calculated H-plane radiation patterns of an inset-fed patch with various notch

depths and widths, with εr = 2.42 and a substrate thickness of h = 0.127 cm. The patch

14
dimensions are shown in Table 1. Results are obtained from a finite element simulation,

using Ansoft HFSSTM.

(a) The notch width is fixed at S = 1.14 cm and the notch depth is varied. The curves
correspond to different notch depths and polarizations as follows: i: xn = 0.126, cross-
polarization, ii: xn = 0.625, cross-polarization, iii: xn = 0.875, cross-polarization, iv: xn =
1.0, cross-polarization, v: xn = 0.875, co-polarization, vi: xn = 0.126, 0.625, and 1.0, co-
polarization.

(b) The notch depth is fixed at xf = 1.01 cm and the notch width is varied. The curves
correspond to different notch widths and polarizations as follows: i: S = 0.57 cm, cross-
polarization, ii: S = 1.90 cm, cross-polarization, iii: S = 2.28 cm, cross-polarization, iv: S
= 3.04 cm, cross-polarization, v: co-polarization for all.

15
 Table 1

εr W (cm) L (cm)
1 8.91 6.06
2.42 5.94 4.04
10.2 2.97 2.02

Table 2

S/Wf εr = 1.00 εr = 2.42 εr = 10.2

Wf = 0.616 cm Wf = 0.380 cm Wf = 0.124 cm
(Wf for 50 Ω feed)
A (Ω) | B (rad) A (Ω) | B (rad) A (Ω) | B (rad)
2 184 | -0.24 182 | -0.13 310 | 0.04
3 194 | -0.27 197 | -0.21 318| -0.03
4 236 | -0.37 221 | -0.28 325 | -0.08

Table 3

εr A (Ω) B (rad)
1.00 194 | 177 -0.27 | -0.24
2.42 197 | 188 -0.21 | -0.12
10.2 318 | NA -0.03 | NA

Table 4

εr A (Ω) B (rad)
1.00 165 -0.17
2.42 188 -0.12
6.15 290 -0.16
10.2 385 -0.15

16
 W W

L L
S
C C

xf xf

g
Wf

M M

Figure 1(a) Figure 1(b)

17
Figure 2

Figure 3

18
Figure 4

19
Figure 5(a)

Figure 5(b)

20