506 I&&& 1 KAlVbHL'l 1 UlVb UfV A I V 1 L I VAl lVVAUb r"nUl-ACTHllUl\' JULY

[SI Frost, A. D., Surface waves in Yagi antennasand dielectric [15] Rlatkins, D. A., Topics in ELectrmzug?zetic Theory. New York:
waveguides, Tech Rept AFCRC-TR-57368, Dept. of Physics,
Tufts University, &ledford, Mass., 1957.
[9] Serracchioli, F., and C. A. Levis, The calculated phase velocity
of long end-fire uniform dipole arral-s, I R E Trans. on d t z t e n m s
andPropagation (Special Supplement), vol AP-7, Dec1959,
950, pp s424-s434.
[lo] Zucker, F. J., Theory and applications of surface Lvaves, Nuovo
czmento (Microwave Optics Symposium Issue, Supplement 3),
vol9, September 1961.
[Ill Brown, G. H.,and R. I\,'. P. King, High-frequency models in
antenna investigations, Proc. I R E , ~ 0 1 2 2Apr
, 1934, pp 457480.
[12] Brillouin, L., HhvePropagation itz PeriodicStructures. Kew
York: Dover, 1953.
[13] Collin, R. E., Field Theory of Guided Waves. Kew York: Mc-
Graw-Hill, 1960.
[14] Rao, B. Rama, Theoretical and experimentalstudies of an-
tennas and arraJ-s in a parallel-plate region, Part IV-1i'ax-e[231
propagation along infinite Yagi-type arraS-s in a parallel-plate
region, Scientific Rept 2,ser 3, Cruft Lab., Han-ard UniversitS-,
Cambridge, Mass., Mar 1963.
[Viley,
1958.
[161 Zucker, F. J., Electromagnetic boundary wa\-es, an introduction.
Rept .IFCRL-63-165, USAF Cambridge Research Lab., Bed-
ford, Mass., Jun 1963.
[I;] Slater, J. C., XicrowaveElectronics. Kew York: McGraw-Hill,
pp 17S177.
[18] Cullen, A. L., Proc. Inst. Elec. Engrs., vol101, pt 4, 1954, pp
225-231.
[19] Chu, E. L., and W. W. Hansen, J., AppZ. Phys., vol 18, Nov
1947, pp 996-1008.
[20] Sengupta, D. L.,On the phase velocity of wave propagation
along an infinite Yagi structure, I R E Trans. o n Antennas and
Propagation, vol AP-7, Jul 1959, pp 234-239.
[21] King, R. IT.P., Linear arrays: currents, impedances, and fields,
I, I R E Trans. 012 A n tPropagation
Supplement),
em(Special
a s and
vol AP-7, Dec 1959, pp SMGS4.57.
Mailloux, R., A unification of antenna-theory and wave-theory:
infinite Yagi-Uda arrays, Tech Rept 451, Cruft Lab.,Harvard
Vniversity, Cambridge, Mass., Jun 1964.

Simple Relations Derived from aPhased-Array

AntennaMade of anInfiniteCurrentSheet

Absfract-The simplest concept of a phased array is an W t e I. INTRODUCTION

planar current sheet backed by a reflecting boundary. The electric
currentsheet, or resistancesheet, is the limiting case of many PLANAR ARRAY of many radiating elements
small electric dipoles, closely spaced, and backed by an open-circuit isused t o develop a narrow pencil beam. The
boundary. If this array is viewed as a receiver, a plane wave incident connections between the elements and the send-
on the array a t some angle (e) meets a boundary resistance varying
ing or receiving circuit are phased to control the beam
in proportion to cos 8 for angles in the H plane, and l/cos e for
angle of deflection from broadside (the "scan angle").
angles in the E plane. If the array is matched at broadside (O=O),
This is the type of antenna commonly called a "phased
the corresponding reflection coefficient has the magnitude (tan $e)*.
array,"implyingbeamsteeringbyelectricalphasing
While the electric current sheet is realizable, the open-circuit
boundary is not. However, a magnetic current sheet can be simu- without mechanical motion of the array.
lated by a conductive sheet with holes utilized as magnetic dipoles, This type of antenna introduces an unusual problem
such a sheet providing the backing equivalent to ashort-circuit
of design: the variationof element impedance with scan
boundary. The lattercase isrelated to the former by electromagnetic
inversion or duality. Therefore,an incident plane wave meets a angle. This variation is caused by the inherent coupling
of the elements, which contributes to the apparent im-
boundary conductance varying in proportion to cos tJ for angles in
the E plane, and l/cos 0 for angles in the H plane. The predictedpedance of each element in a manner dependent on the
behavior is vedied qualitatively by tests of such a modelwith phasing required for the scan angle. With phasing for
elements of a practical size.
wide-angle scanning, the impedance variation from this
The derivation is based on the principle of dividing the space in
cause becomes substantial and should be taken into ac-
front of the array into parallel tubes or waveguides, one for each
count, along with the variation from other causes such
element cell in the sheet or array. This is one of the principles pub-
as the frequency bandwidth.
lished by the author in 1948. A related principle enables the simu-
lation of an infinite array by imaging a few elementsin the walls of a
There have been various studies of the element im-
waveguide. This latter principle is utilized for making tests of the
pedance variation with scan angle. Some are based on
array.
laborious computation of an array of many elements
[ 5 ] , ['i], [12], [13]. Others are based on the concept of
Manuscript received September 28, 1964; revised February 4,
1965. This paper was originally presented at the IEEE Symposium a n infinite array [2], [6], [SI, [14], [l'i], [IS], [21].
on Antennas and Proparation, Sentember, 1964. This latter concept has been found by the author to
Theauthor is President of\S.rheeler Labs., Inc., GreatSeck.
N. Y. offer the best basis for the design of an element for use
1965 Phased-Array
Wheeler:
Antenna Infinite
from an Current Sheet 507

a t all locations ina finite array of many elements. More- G = radiationconductance of magneticdipole
over, i t offers the only evaluation thatis independent of (across a slot) in active array phased for some
the number of elements. Therefore, there is a particular angle.
interest in thebehavior of anelement in an infinite p = voltage-reflection coefficient a t face of array.
array. sub-c = free space
In general, the variation of element impedance with sub-o = broadside (0 = 0).
angle dependson the “fine structure” of the element, and sub-s =sheet.
on the arrangement of elements in the array. However, sub-m =plane of magnetic field ( H ) .
there is a hypothetical arraywhich avoids any question sub-e =plane of electric field ( E ) .
of fine structure. This is the array that is formed of a n sub-i = ideal.
infinite current sheet, representing elements so small and sub-k = Huygens source.
so closely spaced that the fine structure is not resolved.
On the basis of such an array, there is found a simple 111. THEORETICAL BACKGROUXD
derivation for impedance variation with angle, which is
The concept of the infinite array was introduced by
inherent in arrays fitting into a certain pattern. Further-
the author in 1948 [2], long before the recent intensive
more, i t is found that some practical types do fall into
work on phased arrays with beam steering. That publi-
this pattern, so the conclusions from this hypothesis are
cation showed the opportunity for simple computation
useful in practice.
of some properties of a radiating element in an infinite
I t is the purpose of this paper to describe the hypo-
array. This approach had been suggested by the theory
thetical array formed of a n infinite current sheet, to
of such an element in a waveguide. Now it turns out
derive its impedance variation with angle, and to in-
that the same principle is applicable to phased arrays.
troducesomecorollaryconcepts,suchasthe“ideal
Moreover, itis found that the experimental design of a n
element pattern,” which theoretically would avoid the
element for a phased array is facilitated by imaging a
implement variation.
few elements in waveguide walls to simulate an infinite
T h e scope of this treatment is limited to the infinite
array[IT], [2O], [23], [ X ] .
planar array, having a well-defined planar face (ground
-4s an introduction to the present discussion, Figs. 1
plane), which separates the radiation region (free space,
and 2 are reproduced from the 1948 publication. Figure
in front) from the associated circuits (shielded, behind).
1 shows an infinite planar array of electric dipoles in a
A practical example is an array of radiating holes in a
square arrangement in a plane with free space in front
sheet of conducting material (metal).
and “open circuit behind.” This is the same basis to be
I t is noted that the apparent impedance of the ele-
used for the infinite current sheet. Fig. 2 shows a modi-
ment,asformulated here,is the“activeimpedance”
fication of the same to form an array phased for a n
t h a t would be seen looking out of one element with all
oblique angle of radiation. This is a specialcase of a
the other elementsexcited in the phase required for the
phased array, in which adjacent elements are phased in
scan angle.
opposition; a condition thatis most simply simulated by
11. SYMBOLS the metal walls of a rectangular waveguide. (The same
publication also describes the simulation of an infinite
MKS rationalized units.
array in a rectangular waveguide, with oblique angles
1 =effective length of small electric dipole.
of radiation.)
a =element spacing in square array.
Amongtheformulas in that publication, there are
A =a2 =area of element cell in square array.
two thatform the background for the present discussion.
B=scan angle from broadside.
Referring to Fig. 1, the radiation resistance of each ele-
X = free-space wavelength.
ment is given as
E = electrivity (electric permittivity)
1-1 = magnetivity (magnetic permeability) Ro = R,12/a2 = R,12/4. (1)
H = magnetic field intensity (Ajm).
E =electric field intensity (V/m). Referring to Fig. 2, for oblique radiation at an angle 0
I =current in electric dipole. from broadside, in the H plane, the radiation resistance
H , = magnetic field intensityadjacenttoelectric happens to be given fora pair of directions (+e). Tak-
current sheet (X/m). ing one-half of this for one direction,
I , = electric current density in sheet (a/m).
F(0) =relative field intensity in radiation pattern of R, l2
R=- -.
isolated element. cos 0 a2
R= radiation resistance of electric dipole in active
array phased for some angle. Thisformsanintroductiontotheanglevariation of
R, = 377 ohms = wave resistance across square area mpedance that is to be derived. In this case, the radia-
of wavefront in free space. tion resistance increases with angle from broadside.
R,= resistance across square area of sheet. In the 1948 publication,somereliance is placed on
508 TRANSACTIONS
IEEE O M ANTEhWAS AhiD PROPAGATION Julg

earlierderivations of theradiationresistance of a n Further theoretical background is found in more re-

electricdipoleinarectangularwaveguide. T h e com- centpublications,which will bereviewedin a later
pletederivationcan be describedbriefly with reference to section of this paper.
the tubes of radiation in front of the array, as shown in
Figs. 1 and 2. In the broadside direction (@=O), shown
in Fig. 1, the tubes are square and are bounded by hypo- IV. THEINFINITECURRENT SHEET
thetical image planes. The wave resistance between top The present discussion is to be based on an infinite
and bottom of each square cell (u2) is t h a t of free space current sheet. There are two kinds of current sheet that
( R c ) . The electricdipole (of effectivelength = I ) is may be assumed, electric and magnetic. The former is
coupled to this resistance by an effective transformation conceptuallq. the easier, because an electric conductor
ratio (Z/u), so its radiation resistance is proportional to is within our experience. Therefore i t will be utilized for
the square of this ratio, as appears in formula(1). In an the derivations. On the other hand, the magnetic cur-
oblique direction (e), as shown in Fig. 2, each tube is rent sheet (and not the electric)is found to be realizable
decreased in width by the projection cosine, so the re- in the required environment of the array, so i t will be
sistance of the tube and of the dipole is increased by the relied on for experimental verification.
factor l/cos 0. Figure 3 shows the basis for a planar phased array
I t is noted that this simple computation for an in- made of a n electric current sheet. The baseline in Fig.
finite array is based on real power, and, therefore, only 3(a) is thescan-planeprojection of theplane of the
the resistance component is given. In general, there is array. -\hove the line is represented the radiation re-
also a variation of the reactance component,so that the gion (free space) in front of the array. Below the line is
impedance variationis the resultantof both components. assumed t o be an“open-circuit”reflectorbehindthe
array ( E = 0, p = w ). The latter region is not physically
realizable, but is conceptually simple; i t is carried over
H PLANE fromFigs. 1 and 2.
I
I
I
The electric current sheet is in the planeof the array.
I
I
I
I
I t has a current density 1,of uniform amplitude, but
I I
I phased for radiating a plane wave in a direction a t a n
angle 0 from broadside. The current densityis associated
with a magnetic intensity H , of equal amplitude and

H PLANE E PLANE

MAGNETIC

WALL 7’
,/
< ELECTRIC
WALL?‘
,’
0
H

Is Is
(a) Plane of scan, showing current sheet and magnetic fields.

a a
E PLANE

Fig. 1. ;in infinite planararray at the boundary of half-infinite

space. (a) Plan. (b) Elevation.

H PLANE

r----- --1 r - - - - - - - T
I I I

(b) Plane of array, showing element cell of current sheet

and equivalent current element.
\I
Fig. 3. .An idealized model of a planar array, made of an electric
Fig. 2. The same array phased for an oblique angle of radiation. current shzet.
1YOO w
rnmed-Army
neem:
Antenna
phase, but crossed in space. In the radiation region, the
H plane and E plane are determined to include, respec-
tively, the H , and I , vectors. The scan angle I3 may be
in either of these planes, as shown.
Figure 3(b) shows the face of the array, the infinite
current sheet being exemplified by a square cell of area
A = d . For some purposes, there will be used also the
illustrated concept of a small electric current element,
or electric dipole, equivalent to a small cell. These are
said t o be equivalent if they have equal moment. If the
moment of the latter is ZI,as indicated, the condition
for equivalence is
I1 = a(a1,) = L41,. (3)
Forthebroadsidedirection of radiation (I3 = 0), ob-
tained by uniform phase over the array, the radiation
resistance Ro of this element is given by formula (1).
The current sheet may have any value of uniform
surface resistance R, (the resistance across any square
of the surface). For present purposes, i t is assumed to
be “matched” to free space for broadside radiation, so
R,=R, (377 ohms, the wave resistance across a square
area of wavefront in free space).
V. THEVARIATION OF WITH SCANANGLE
IMPEDANCE
Sincethereceivingviewpointmaybeconceptually
simpler, i t will be taken first for deriving the variation
of impedance with scan angle. This derivation will be
based on Fig. 3(a), showing the two principal planes of
scan angle, theH plane and the E plane. Any reflection
from the face of the array, aswill be derived, appears in
the form of a beam radiated at the opposite angle from
broadside.
Referring t o a n oblique angle of scanning in the H
plane, we have a situation similar to Fig. 2. The incom-
ing wave sees a section of current sheet which is wider
han the section of wavefront, so the wave appears to
be reflected by a resistance t h a t is lesser in the ratio,
cos 13. The resulting voltage-reflectioncoefficient is nega-
tive :
cos e - 1
= - (tan+e)z.
Pm =
COS e+1
Referring instead t o a n oblique angle of scanning in
the E plane, we find an opposite situation. The incom-
ing wave sees a section of current sheet which is longer
than the section of wavefront, so the wave appears to
be reflected by a resistance t h a t is greater in the ratio,
l/cos 0. Theresultingvoltage-reflection coefficient is
positive :
Changingovertothesendingviewpoint, we may
derive the same relations, but naturally the reflection
p o r n an Infinate G‘urrmlt Sheet 509
coefficient will be reversed. Here we refer also t o t h e
equivalent current elements in Fig. 3(b).
The method is given in the author’s early paper on
thissubject [ 2 ] , hererepresentedbyFigs.1and 2.
T h e space in front of the array is partitioned by hypo-
thetical waveguide walls and the radiation resistance of
cach clcmcnt is formulatcd.Referring t o Fig. 3(a),
these walls are located by projecting the element cell in
the beam direction determined by the array phasing.
The nature of the walls is determined by the require-
ment for imaging the fields of a uniform plane wave:
the walls parallel t o t h e H field are “electric” walls, or
“short-circuit” boundaries ( E = oc , p = 0) ; and the malls
parallel to the E field are “magnetic” walls, or “open-
circuit” boundaries (E = 0, p = a).
From (1), the radiation resistance of each element is
known for broadside phasing ( R ofor I3 = 0). Changing to
the phasing for an oblique angle modifies the situation
in two respects. First, the area of wavefront is decreased
by the factor cos 0, increasingtheresistancebythe
factor l/cos 8, as in (2). Second, the radiation pattern
of the element may affect the relative amountof radia-
tion in the beam direction. The lattereffect is to be for-
mulated here.
The radiation pattern of a small electric dipole has
the following dependence on the angle I3 in Fig. 3.
H plane: E/Eo = Fm(e) = 1 (6)
E plane: E / E o = F,(O) = cos 0. (7)
This is the familiar “doughnut” pattern, or specifically
the half of this pattern that is located in front of the
array. These factors may be regarded as foreshortening
of the element length by projection on the wavefront.
The effect on the radiation resistance is naturally pro-
portional to the squareof this factor.
The resulting variationof element resistance with an-
gle is given by the following formulas, which are essen-
tially similar to some derived by Stark [6].
1
H plane: R/Ro = -[Fm(f3)I2= l/cos 0 (8)
COS e
1
E plane: R/Ro = - [ F e ( e ) ] 2= cos 8. (9)
COS e
As would be expected from the principle of reciprocity,
these ratios are the inverse of those derived from the
receiving viewpoint. Each of the corresponding reflec-
tion coefficients is merely reversed.
Thefactorl/cos 8, whichappearsin (8) and (9),
may be inferred from another viewpoint in transmission.
Let us consider a finite planar array of many elements,
so large that the beam width is a small fraction of one
radian. I n any particular plane of scan, the aperture
width projected in the beam directionis proportional to
cos 8 , so the beam width is inversely proportional to this
ratio. The powerin thebeam is proportionaltothe
factor F2 in the beam direction, and also to the beam impedance with angle.14’hen approximated by an array
width. The latter introduces the factor l/cos 0 in the of elements of appreciable size and spacing, there is a
radiation resistance. departure from this simple rule. Usually, the resistance
From the sending viewpoint, the reflected power is variation is somen-hat different, and thereis also appre-
returned to the generator, or may be absorbed in an ciable variation of reactance.
intervening“isolator.”In
the
case of generator
a In general, the angle from broadside either increases
matched to the element broadside resistance Ro,the net or decreases the radiation loading of the element, from
result of the reflection is t o decrease the radiated power thesendingviewpoint.Theradiationloading of a n
below the “available” power by the factor (1 - p ’). I I electric dipole is proportional to resistance, while that
Figure 4 shows the variation of elementresistance of amagneticdipole is proportionaltoconductance.
and reflection coefficient with scan angle in the H and From the formulas given, the following conclusions can
E planes. The polarity of p , in Fig. 4(a), is given for the bedrawn.
electric dipole, as in Fig. 3(b).
Variatiolt of radiation loading by increasing angle (0)
Plane of angle (e) Radiating elentent
E dipole M dipole
H plane increasing decreas-ing
E plane decreasing increasmg

VI. THEIDEAL ELEMENT PATTERN

la) lb)
Fig. 4. The variation of reflection Kith scan angle, in the idealized
model. (a) For the case of electric dipoles, from the sending view-
point. (b) For either kind of dipoles, from either viewpoint.
T h e formulas (8) and (9) give a basis for describing
an “ideal” element pattern that would yield an element
resistanceinvariantwithscanangle,likewiseinany
scan plane (or in any linear polarization relative to the
scan plane). This pattern is F,(B), defined as follows.

I n general terms, the same derivation is applicable to

theinversecase of a magneticcurrentsheet,with Figure 5 shows the three patterns mentioned here. In
transformation by the principles of duality. This means either plane, the ideal pattern (E‘H’) is a change from
interchanging H and E , interchanging open-circuit and the dipole pattern( H t o H’ or E t o E’).
short-circuitreflector,interchangingresistance R and
conductance G (or inverting R), andinterchanging
voltage and current-reflection coefficients (or reversing
the sign of the voltage-reflection coefficient),The radia-
tion patternof a small magnetic dipole (or slot ina metal
sheet) is as follows,
E plane: E/Eo = Fe(B) = 1 (10)
H plane: E/& = F,(O) = cos 8. (11)
T h e resultingvariation of elementconductance is as 0
follows,
Fig. 5. Isolatedelement patterns of a small electric dipole.
1
E plane: G/Go = - [Fe(0)l2= l/cos 0 (12)
cos 0 The element pattern, as used here, is t h a t of a n iso-
1 lated element, and the ideal pattern is derived on the
H plane: G/Go = -[Fm(f3)I2= cos 8. same basis. This same concept might have been inferred
COS e
frompreviousarticles,though not explicitlystated
Of greatest importance is the fact that the magnetic [SI, [6]. An ideal element pattern has been implied or
current sheet can be simulated in a physical structure.A described also on a different basis, the element being
metal sheet can be used as the required short-circuit located in the environment of a n infinite array of pas-
reflector, and holes in the sheet can be used to simulate siveelements[l8].Bothviewpointshappentoyield
therequiredmagneticdipolesasradiatingelements. the same shape for the ideal element pattern, but with
Such a practical structure will be described further on. different significance.
The current sheet has only resistance and no reac- It is noted in passing that there is a kind of simple
tance, so the simple theory gives the entire variation of radiator that offers a theoretical attraction for use as
1965 Wheeler:
Plmed-Arra.y
Antenna from a.n Infinite Current Sheet 511

an element in an array. I t is the “electromagnetic di-

pole” or “Huygens source” [ l ] , [3], [4], [g], [ll]. I t is
formedby crossed superposition of anelectricdipole
(or current element) and a magnetic dipole (or current
000
loop) radiating equal (maximum) fields in one direction
(the axis). This gives the same amplitude of field in all
planes through the axis, namely,
I Fh(e) I = +(I + COS e) +e)’.
= (COS (15)
This hasa cardioid shape which is a close approximation
t o t h e ideal shape (14). Aside from its favorable pat-
tern, i t has some peculiarities that require further study
before it can be used as an element in an array. 1) It is
difficult t o realize in a physical structure. 2) I t is a two- (bl C -

port for each linear polarization, as distinguished from

the usual one-port. 3) Its pattern would be destroyed
b y a n y reflector behind the element. In the meantime,
thistype of radiator offers someintriguingopportu-
nities for theoretical studies.
VII. A PRACTICAL
STRUCTCRE
-4s previously mentioned, the relations derived here
are applicable toa practical structure simulating a mag-
netic current sheet backed b); a short-circuit reflector. Fig. 6. An array of circular holes in a metal sheet. (a) Square array.
Figure 6 shows such a structure. The array is formed (b) Triangular array.(c)Cross-section in cardinal plane C-C,
showing dielectric-disk loading in circular waveguide.
of a metal sheet with the elements radiating through
holesin the sheet. It has some properties in common the impedance variation with angle,which is the subject
with the arrays of slots, as exemplified in the studies by of this monograph.
Rabinowitz,Edelberg,andOliner [SI, [8].
There is a periodic array of holes in either of the two 17111. EXPERIMENTAL VERIFICATION
forms that are useful. Figure 6(a) shows a square array, The author’s laboratory has made testsof a practical
whichis thesimplest form.Figure6(b)shows a tri- array utilizingsuch a structure. infinite arrayhas
angulararray, whichis stillsimpleand offers some been simulated by imaging a few elements in the plane
practical advantages.Also it gives the closer approxima- walls of awaveguide[17], [ZO], [23],[24].Thenthe
tion to a current sheet, for the same separation of adja- reflection coefficient has been measured from the 1. rlew-
centelements.Figure 6(c)shows a crosssection of point of reception.
either form through a “cardinal” plane (C-C). The experimental structure is a triangular array, as
T h e resistance sheet in this presentation is isotropic. shown in Fig. 6(b). Thehole diameter is 0.45 wavelength,
Following this concept here, each element hole is made andthecenter-to-centerspacing is 0.60wavelength.
circular, and is backed by a circular waveguide. Simula- T h e dielectric loading is sufficient t o lower the TE-11
tion of the current sheet requires that the hole diameter cutoff frequencydowntoabout l/d? or 0.7 of the
andcenter-to-centerspacingbesufficientlysmallin operating frequency. Figure 7 shows on the reflection
terms of the wavelength, so that this “fine structure” chart the voltage-reflection coefficients for several scan
cannot be“resolved”bythewave.Thiscondition is angles. Each point is observed in an individual wave-
nearly satisfied if these dimensions are much less than guide to simulate the particular angle in an infinite ar-
one-half wavelength, whereas dimensions of this order ray.
are required in practice. In the circular waveguide, the In this experiment, there is no attempt to provide
TE-11 mode is to be utilized. Its propagation requires impedancematching at thearray faceforbroadside
dielectric loading in this diameter. Such loading may be phasing, which is assumed in the theoretical derivation.
provided by spaced circular disksof high dielectric con- Each waveguideis provided with a matched termination
stant, to avoid proportionate loading of the undesired t o assure a pure traveling wave in reception.
TM-01 mode [19]. On the reflection chart, Fig. 7, thetwoextreme
This structure will handle any polarization. In prac- points represent a large scan angleof 56” in the cardinal
tice, i t requires impedance matching over the required plane, C-C in Fig. 6(b), withE or H vector in this plane
frequency band, which can be approximated by insert- as indicated. The intermediate point represents a small
ing obstacles in the circular waveguide. There remains scan angle of 29”, so i t is not much different from 0”
512 IEEE TRANSACTIONS O N ANTEhWAS
AND
PROPAGATION July

IX. HISTORICAL EVOLUTION

OF THE CONCEPTS

Having developed a simple picture of the arrayreflec-

tion, as it varies with scan angle, we shall review the
evolution of ideas that has led t o this result. We shall
pass over the historic studies of the coupling between
elementary antennas, which enabled the detailed com-
putation of finitearrays,sincethismethodbecomes
unduly laborious for a large number of elements. T h e
present objective is to evaluate the typical or average
behavior of an element in a very large planar array,
the number of elements being in the range from 10 by
10 = 100, UP to 100 by 100 = 10,000.
T h e viewpoint of the infinite array was introduced by
the author's publicationof 1948 [2]. I n a unified presen-
tation, it showed the identity of behavior of a radiating
element in a waveguide with plane walls and in an infi-
nite array. I t then applied the waveguide viewpoint for
computation of theelementradiationresistancein
Fig. 7. The coefficient of reflection from the face of an array, at closed form, avoiding the summation of a doubly infinite
various angles, from the receiving vien-point. series.Inherentinthispresentationweresomemore
specific principles whose significance was not appreci-
ated until Iater.
(broadside);thisanglehappenstobe in theinter- T h e infinite array which received most attention in
cardinalplane (30" from C-C) with H inthisplane. t h a t monograph was the planararray phased fora
These angles are well within the limits out to which broadside pencilbeam, Fig. 1 here. For theoretical
the array would develop a single beam free of grating purposes, this was identified with a nonphysical rectan-
lobes. gular waveguide, so the element behavior in the array
On this chart, the scale of normalizedresistanceis mas foundtobedifferentfromwhathadpreviously
marked in the region of interest. been computed for practical waveguides. On the other
The relationof the three points on the reflection chart hand, the infinite array which was shown phased for
is,roughly,whatwouldbeexpectedfromthesimple obliqueradiation,Fig. 2, wasintendedonlyforits
theory based on a magnetic current sheet, off-center, theoretical interest
in
relation
to
the
well-known
though as not matched for broadside. 1) The points are wave behavior in physical rectangular waveguides. At
near the realaxis of impedanceandreflection coeffi- that time, the author did not envision the future oppor-
cient. 2) The resistance is higher for E in the scan plane. tunities for an array with electrical phasing for beam
3 ) The extreme points are separated slightly more than steering without mechanical motion. However, the be-
the predicted closest resistance ratio, the lowest value havior of such a phasedarraywasinherentinthe
being roughly 0.22 times the highest value, as comparedtheoreticalderivationforwaveguides, as seenhere
with (cos 56")2= 0.31. 4) The intermediate point is not (2).
farfromtheratiomean of theextremevalue of re- About ten years later, the growing interest in phased
sistance. arrays began to be reflected in the published literature.
Regarding the experimental points more critically, it There were three principal sources of publications re-
is reasonable to say that all the discrepancies ma>- be lated to the present subject, namely, S. Edelberg and
caused by the size of the element, specifically the hole -4. A . Oliner [SI, P. S . Carter, Jr. [ 7 ] , and J. L. 411en
diameter and the spacing. The resistance variation is [IS]. Of special significance, also, were the reports of
close t o t h e predicted amount and there is little varia- S . J. Rabinowitz [SI, J . L. Allen [12], and L. Stark [6].
tion of reactance. At least, there is qualitative agreement X11 of these sources were concerned with the variation
and a fair approximation to quantitative agreement.'I t of element impedance with scan angle.
is remarkable that it has been possible t o measure the Among the recent publications, the one most closely
behavior of a practical element in an environment simu- related to the present subject is that of Edelberg and
lating an infinite array. Oliner [SI. Theyextendthewaveguideanalogytoa
rectangular array of holes in a metal sheet, and to any
More recent theoreticaland experimental studies have evaluated scan angle. ITrhile their presentation is complicated by
the reflection coefficient from the transmitting viewpoint. From this the finite dimensions of the element cell and the hole,
viewpoint, the phase of reflection varies with scan angle and polari-
zation, as affected mainly by element spacing. onecangleanfrom itthesimplerelationsthatare
1965 Wheeler: Phased-Array
Antenna
presented here, for the limiting case of small elements
and close spacing,simulatingthemagneticcurrent
sheet.
The concept of a n ‘‘ideal” element pattern has not
yet been published in clear and explicit terms. In the
formulas of Rabinowitz [j],and in those of Stark [6],
the radiation resistance of an element is seen to depend
on the radiation pattern of a n isolated element (includ-
ing its reflector). From these formulas, one might infer
t h a t an element having a particular pattern (14) would
cause the radiation resistance to be invariant with scan
angle. An attempt is madehere to present this topic
clearly. (This concept of isolated element pattern should
not be confused with the different concept of array ele-
mentpattern,thelatterbeing effectivein the array
environment[HI.Ithappensthatthe ideal pattern
has the same shape in both cases.)
While beyond the scope of this report, it is natural
to speculate on thesignificance of the impedance varia-
tion with a current sheet, andhow it might bedecreased
in practice. The current sheet is a thin array, havingno
depth in the transition face between the circuits and the
radiation region. One approach fordecreasing the
impedancevariationinvolvesstructuraldepthwith
dimensionalcontrols,such as projections in front,or
the spacing between dipoles and reflector, or the addi-
tion of interconnecting circuits behind the array [ls],
[22]. ilTe may infer a principle that the simple relations
are associated with a thin array of small elements, and
that element size or structural depthoffers some oppor-
tunity for departure from these relations.
Theproblems of evaluatinganarrayarethose of
computation, on onehand, and of measurement, on
the other. Since the computations were greatly simpli-
fied bytheanalogybetweenan infinite array and a
waveguide, i t should not be surprising that a similar
approach has been found invaluable in measurements.
Thisapplication is naturallyrestrictedtothe cases
where the hypothetical waveguideis physically reliable.
Since 1960, the author and his associates have been ex-
ploring the discrete cases where a physical waveguide is
availableforsimulatingthebehavior of a n infinite
array [17], [20],[23], [HI. Rectangularwaveguides
have been utilized for square and triangular arrays, and
there are some cases of the latter type where a triangu-
lar waveguide is particularly useful.
The concept of an element in a n infinite array has
been acquiring stature also as the sound basis for de-
signing a practical element for use in a large array of
many elements. The element impedance in an infinite
array appears to be centered in the range of element
impedance at all locationsinthefinitearray.This
practical utility excites further interest in the concept.
I t is common experience in science, that the ultimate
simplificationinconceptscomes as aculmination of
more complicated studies. The present topic appears to
from an Infinite Cument Sheet 513
beanexample of this principle, and an attempt has
been made to reduce it to the simplest terms.
X. CONCLUSIOK
The current sheet is a highlysimplified conceptual
model of a phased array. It is used as the basisfor
deriving some simple relations. One is the variation of
element impedance and reflection coefficient with scan
angle.Another is the idealisolated-elementpattern
t h a t would make the element radiation resistance in-
variantwithangle.
The derivationrelies on the principle that an element
in an infinite arraybehaves like onein a waveguide
with properly defined walls, as presented in the author’s
monograph of 1948.
In thismodel, the reflection coefficient varies with the
scan angle, oppositely for the H or E vector in the scan
plane. The predicted variation has been verified qualita-
tively by tests of an array approximately simulating a
magnetic current sheet.
L~CKNOWLEDGMENT
The author’s organization hasbeen engaged in active
work on the design of phased arrays under the direction
of Bell TelephoneLaboratories. T h a t workhaspro-
vided thestimulus for this study, and the author is
particularlygratefulto R. L. Mattinglyand P. H.
Smith for their encouragement.
T h e staff of Wheeler Laboratories has participated
in this study in various wag-.s, particularlyinhelpful
discussions and the experimental verification, for which
the author wishes t o express his appreciation.
REFEREKCES
111 S . A. Schelkunoff, Electromagnetic Waves. Princeton, X , .J.:
Van Nostrand, 1943, pp. 354-355. (Huygens source, cardlold
patterns.)
[2] H. -4. IVheeler, “The radiation resistance of an antenna in an
infinite array or waveguide,” Proc. IRE, vol. 36, pp. 478488,
April 1948.
[3] E. C. Jordan, Elecfronzngnetic Waves and RadietingSystems.
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1950, pp. 521-523.
(Huygens source, cardioid pattern.)
[4] S. A. Schelkunoff and H. T. Friis, Antennas-Theory and P r u -
tice. Yew York: IViley,1952, pp. 531-523. (Huygens source,
cardioid pattern.)
[SI S. J. Rabinowitz, “The conductance of a slot in an array an-
tenna,” M.I.T. Lincoln Lab., Lexington, Mass., Tech.Rept.
192, December 31, 1958. (Rectangular array of slots in metal
sheet. Computation by summation of series. Relation between
element pattern and variation of radiation conductance.)
161 L. S t y k , “Radiation impedance of a dipole in an infinite
array, HughesAircraft Co., Fullerton, Calif., Tech.Rept.
FL 60-230, May 1, 1960. (Impedance matrix, resistance given
by first term of summation. Relationship between element pat-
tern and variation of element resistance.) Submitted to IEEE
Trans. on Antenrzas and Propagation.
[7] P. S. Carter, Jr;,, “Mutual impedance effects in large beam
scanning arrays, IRE Trans. on Antennas a.7d Propagation,
vol. AP-8, pp. 276-285, May 1960. (Comparison between finite
and infinite width of array.)
[8] S. Edelberg and A. A. Oliner, “Mutual coupling effects in
large antennaarrays:Part I-Slot arrays,” IRE Trans. on
Axtennus atzd Propagatw?z, vol. -4P-8, pp. 286-297, Ma);1960.
(i1;aveguide viewpoint, starting with all modes and simplifying
to a single mode.)
[9] J. D. Hanfling, “Mapping of the far field polarization of an-
514 IEEE TRANSACTIONS O N AArTEhrlVAS AhTD PROPAGATION
tennas by the stereographic projection,”1LI.S. thesis, Polytechnic
Institute of Brooklyn, New York, N. Y . , June 1960. (Crossed
Huygens sources for unidirectional radiation with pure circular
polarization, realization by electric dipole and current loop.)
[lo] J. L. Allen, et a]., “Phased array antenna studies, 1 Jull- 1959
to 1 J u l s 1960,” M.I.T. Lincoln Lab., Lexington, hIass., Tech.
Rept. 228, ASTIA4Doc. 249, 470, Xu,Oust 1960.
[ l l ! H. Jasik, “Fundamentals of antennas,” in Antenna Engineering
Handbook. Ken- York: \$?ley, 1961, ch. 2, pp. 7-10. (EhI dipole
cardioid pattern, realization b y electric dipole and current loop.)
[12] J. L. Allen, et al., “Phased array radar studies, 1 July 1960 to
1 July 1961,” M.I.T. Lincoln Lab., Lexington, RIass.. Tech.
Rept. 236, November 1961. (Computed variation of reflection
with angle for se\-eral cases of dipoles with reflector.)
[13] -, “Gain and impedance variation in scanned dipole arrays.”
I R E Tra zs. on .4ntennas and Propagation, vol. AP-10, pp. 566-
572, September 1962. ,Many references.)
[14] H. A. \<heeler. “Principles of phased arrays,” \\heeler Labs.,
Great Keck, L. I., N.Y., P-1116, May 1963. (Xotes for three
seminars, diagrams, many references.)
[15] P. \%’.Hannan. D. S. Lerner, and G. H. Knittel, “\Vide-angl:
impedance matching calculated for a phased arra?- antenna,
1963 G-AP Sywap.Digest, pp. 228-233. (Achieved by intercon-
necting circuits behind the array.)
[16] J. L. Allen, “The theory of array antennas,’M.I.T. Lilcoln
Lab., Lexington, Mass., Tech. Rept. 323, July 25, 1963. (Ex-
cellent survey, many references.)
[ l i ] P. \V. Hannan, P. J. Meier, and >.I. A. Balfour, “Simulation of
phased array antenna impedance in waveguide,” IEEE Trans.
Geodesic Lens Antennas for Low-Angle Radiation
Abstract-Previous unit-index geodesic lensantenna designs
have not been able toproduce a lens with good radiation characteris-
tics in or near the plane of the lensrim. This paper extends previous
work topernitthe design of a geodesic lens for angles within
appro-atelp 2 0 ~of the plane of the lens -.hi^ is accomplished
by requiring that less than the full semicircular aperture be exactly
focused, and also by dividing the outer annulus into two or more
constant-slope sections. The capability of theselenses for beam
elevation positioning is also discussed.
INTRODUCTION
A GEKERAL ANALYSIS of geodesic Luneberg
lenses has been considered previously by Rud-
duck and Walter.* In this class of lenses the index
of refraction is arbitrary and the necessary contour is
obtained for radiation at an arbitrary elevationangle p.
Unfortunately,theunit-indexdesignsdescribedby
Rudduck and Walter1 are unable to produce a lens with
2 Rinehart, R. F., A solution of the rapid scanning problem for
good radiation characteristics for small valuesof 8, t h a t radar antennae, J . Appl. Phps., V O ~19, Sept 1948, pp 860-862.
Manuscript received October 12, 1964; revised January 6, 1965.
The 13-ork reported in this paper was supported in part by Contract
S 62269-2184 between U. S. Naval Air Development Center, Johns-
ville, Pa., and Ohio State University Research Foundation.
The authors arewith the Antenna Lab., Dept. of Electrical Eugi-
neering, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
1 Rudduck, R. C., and C. H. \Valter, A general analysis of geodesic
Luneberg lenses, I R E Trans. on Antemas and Propagation, 1-01
AP-10, Jul 1962, pp 4G-450.
JdY
011 Antennas and Propagatiotz (Communications), vol. 4P-11,
pp. 715-716, November 1963.
[18] P. \V. Hannan, “The element-gain paradox for a phased-array
antenna,” I R E Trans. on Antennas and Propa.ga.tion,vol. AP-12,
pp. 423433, July 1964. (The ideal element pattern is stated
on the basis of an element located in the array environment,
which is not the same as the isolated element pattern used in
the present paper, though the shapeof the ideal pattern happens
to be the same in both cases.)
[19] P. J. Neier, M. A . Balfour, and H. A. Wheeler, “Circular wave-
guide loaded with dielectric discs for increased usable band-
width,” 1964 G-MTT Intersat‘l Symp. Program and Digest,
pp. 33-36.
[20] P. \V. Hannan and 31. A. Balfour, “Phased-array element radia-
tion determined by simulation in waveguide,” 1964 G-AP Inter-
nat’l Synp. Program and Digest, pp. 143-149.
[21] H. -4. \\.;heeler, ”Simple relations derived from a phased array
made of an infinite current sheet,” 1964 G-AP Internat’l Sywzp.
Program and Digest, pp. 157-160.
[22] P. W. Hannan, D. S. Lerner, and G. H. Knittel, “Impedance
matching a phased-array antenna over wide scan angles by
connecting circuits,’ I E E E Trans. on Antennas and Propa.gation,
vol. AP-13, pp. 28-34, January 1965.
[23] P. \V. Hannanand 31. A . Balfour, “Simulation of a phased-
array antenna in waveguide,” IEEE Tram. o x Antennas and
Propagation, v01.~;4P-13, pp. 342-353, May 1965.
[24] &I. 4. Balfour, Phased-arraysimulators in waveguide for a
triangulararrangement of elements,” IEEE Trans. on An-
tennus and Propagation (Commzcnication.s),vol. AP-13, pp. 475-
476, May 1965.
is, for B less than approximately 20”. This regionis of
particular interest if a lens were to be flush mounted-
on the fuselage of an aircraft for instance. The unit-
index characteristic is important because i t eliminates
the need for dielectric materials in a lens, thus allowing
high power handling capabilities to be achieved.
Rinehart? hasderivedthegeodesic solution for the
rim-fed Luneberglensantennawhichradiates in the
plane of the Rinehart’s
rim.
lens lens,
however,
has a
vertical dopeat the rim. This vertical slope gives rise t o
anapertureelementpatterngenerally
direction, whereas the phase distribution
in the /3=90”
is for /3 =O”
radiation, which is not compatible with the element pat-
tern. T o overconlethis, Kunz,3 Warrenand Pinnell,*
Scheggi and di F r a n ~ i a and
, ~ others have attacked the
3 Kunz, K. S., Propagation of microwaves between a parallel pair
of doubly cuned conducting surfaces, J . Appl. Phys., vol 25, May
1954, pp 642-653.
* \yarren, F. G. R., and S. E. A. Pinnell, The mathematics of the
tin hat scanning antenna, Tech Rept 7, KCX \‘ictor Co., Ltd.,
hIontreal, Canada, Sep 28, 1951.
5 Scheggi, A. XI., and G. T. diFrancia, Experimental test of a
360’ field lens for microwaves, Tech Note 6, Contract 61(052)-67,
Centra Di Studio PerLa Fisica Delle Microonde, Consiglio Nazionale
Delle Ricerche, Florence, Italy, 1959.