154 IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL.

3, 2004

Linear Connected Arrays

R. C. Hansen, Life Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—The concept of connected (or coupled) dipoles in a

linear array, which improves wideband performance, is examined.
A long wire with multiple feeds is the model, using rigorous mo-
ment method analysis. Edge waves of current appear not to be
attenuated; around half-wave dipole length the current peaks are
one wavelength apart, with deep nulls. For dipole lengths around
quarter-wave the current peaks and dips are modest. This trend
continues to shorter dipoles; for lengths of 0 1 wavelength or less,
the current is nearly constant along the array. This approximates
the current sheet of Wheeler; the impedance mismatch is much less
severe than for an array of unconnected dipoles of the same dimen-
sions.
Index Terms—Connected array, current sheet, current standing
waves, edge effects, electronic scanning, finite array.

I. INTRODUCTION

I NTERCONNECTION of collinear linear or planar arrays

was considered at least as early as 1970, by Baum, and it was
recognized that the current continuity provided adequate low
Fig. 1. 10 wire, feeds at 0:5; 30 scan.

frequency performance [1]. Such arrays have applications for
wideband electronic scanning [2]–[4]. It is important to know
how the currents on these arrays behave with frequency and with
scan angle. This letter addresses current behavior.
II. ARRAY MODEL
Since linear arrays of coupled dipoles exhibit many of the
characteristics of planar arrays of coupled dipoles, a linear array
will be modeled. The array consists of a wire many wavelengths
long, interrupted by feeds at regular nominally half-wave in-
tervals. Alternatively, the array model is a collinear array of
half-wave dipoles fed at the centers and connected at the con-
tiguous ends. The amplitude and phase of the current distribu-
tion along the wire is of crucial importance, so it is modeled
by the moment method. A Galerkin moment method code using
piecewise sinusoidal expansion and test functions is used; mu-
tual impedances are calculated using Carter’s method [5]. Six
expansion functions are used per dipole; this should give ex-
cellent results. One expansion function bridges across the con-
tiguous dipole ends, thus allowing current to flow from dipole to
dipole. Each feed point connects to a load (generator). Results
of the code are validated against codes for conventional dipole
arrays by inserting large values of resistance half-way between
the feeds, thus simulating a conventional dipole array. The mu-
tual impedances and the equation solver use double precision
complex, and the program is run on an HP 64 bit UNIX Work-
station.
Manuscript received January 22, 2004; revised May 7, 2004
The author is at Tarzana, CA 91357 USA (www.rchansen.com).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/LAWP.2004.832125
1536-1225/04$20.00 © 2004 IEEE
The simulation code allows results to be calculated for
a number of angles with a specified feed spacing, or for a
number of feed spacings in wavelengths at a specific scan
angle. Parameters calculated are the magnitude and phase of
the current distribution along the wire. The code allows up to
100 feed points representing 600 complex double precision
simultaneous equations.
A most important finding is that the load impedance must
be included in the simulation, in the impedance matrix. In con-
ventional dipole arrays whether is part of the impedance ma-
trix has little effect upon current distributions and impedance.
Of course in all cases, the affects power transfer. Without
in the matrix, the impedance versus frequency is unstable,
and the edge wave currents are less attenuated and less pre-
dictable. In all results that follow, the simulation includes
in the impedance matrix. A value of 400 was used in the fig-
ures. Use of 200 changes the current scale a modest amount,
but the current shapes are essentially the same. The connected
array dipole resistance is typically between these two values of
.
III. CURRENT PHASE AND AMPLITUDE
The current distribution and the impedance at the central feed
point are direct results from the moment method procedure.
Fig. 1 shows phase along a wire, for 30 scan. In Fig. 1,
the dipoles go from expansion segments 1 to 6, 6 to
to 114, and 114 to 119. Feeds are located at expansion segments
. A close examination shows that the sharp peaks
correspond to a scan angle of 30 , however the phase slope at
other expansion segments on the connected dipoles appears to
be irregular. Additional insight is given by examining array be-
havior where the feed spacing is halved and the number
HANSEN: LINEAR CONNECTED ARRAYS
Fig. 2. 10 wire, feeds at 0:25; 30 scan.
Fig. 3. 10 wire, feeds at 0:5; 0 scan.
of feeds is doubled (40), resulting in a wire again. Fig. 2
shows phase along the connected dipole array, again for a 30
scan. Again the peaks roughly follow the scan phase slope; now
the phase varies linearly over all expansion segments, unlike
Fig. 1 where the dipole lengths were evident.
The wire at broadside exhibits a surprising current ampli-
tude distribution. Over the entire wire every other “dipole” has
very small current; see Fig. 3. Current is peaked, and peaks are
one wavelength apart. Similar current peaks occur for a plane
wave incident on a finite length wire [6]. At broadside, with all
feeds in phase, a nearly constant current might have been ex-
pected. It appears that the connected array current exhibits cus-
pidation, without attenuation or edge effects. With a 30 scan,
every fourth section of wire has small current. Peaks of cur-
rent are now apart. See Fig. 4. This increase in the period of
the currents with scan angle agrees with observations of [7], and
lends some support to the unattenuated edge current hypothesis.
Changing the wire length to , and , with 20 feeds,
still shows a basic picture of peaks apart; the intermediate
peaks are irregular, and partially raised. Thus, the edge current
“resonance” is not a function of element spacings in free space
wavelengths. Because the edge current velocity appears to be
155
Fig. 4. 10 wire, feeds at 0:5; 30 scan.
Fig. 5. 10 wire, feeds at 0:25; 30 scan.
that of light, these currents are not related to surface waves. Sur-
face waves are slow waves, and are not supported by collinear
dipoles. Use of fat dipoles, such as bowtie dipoles, might alter
these edge current effects.
When twice the number of feeds is used, with spacing,
the 30 scan current distribution is markedly changed, as seen
in Fig. 5. Now, the dipoles go from expansion segments 1 to
to to 239. Each dipole now has a roughly si-
nusoidal distribution, and the dips are modest. The latter is ac-
centuated with a dipole spacing of ; the current is roughly
constant over the wire. Thus, at low frequencies the conti-
nuity of current approximates the current sheet of Wheeler [8];
this improves the low frequency impedance as will appear later.
The edge currents, which are of modest amplitude in dipole ar-
rays, are much stronger in coupled wires; there is no collinear
mutual impedance to attenuate the currents.
Because connecting the dipoles produces a forced resonance
in current, it is useful to consider whether a reactance connecting
the dipoles would perform better. At half-wave feed spacing the
ideal reactance would be infinite, as isolated dipoles are robust.
For small feed spacings the ideal reactance would be small, to
allow continuity of current. A study of reactance coupled arrays
156
is underway; preliminary results show that neither inductive nor
capacitive coupling produces wide bandwidth. However, non-
Foster negative inductance coupling provides correct physics.
IV. CONCLUSION
Incorporation of terminating characteristic impedances in the
model impedance matrix is essential; use of a zero value pro-
duces significant changes in the amplitude and phase of the cur-
rent over the connected array. For arrays of half-wave dipoles
the current exhibits strong resonances along the array, with a
period of one wavelength. This is apparently due to the edge
currents present in finite dipole arrays not being attenuated in
connected arrays. For arrays with dipole length roughly , Apr. 2000, p. 93.
the current amplitude distributions show modest dips, and the
phases are well behaved for scanning. For dipole lengths much
shorter than , the current is roughly constant over the entire
array. This results in an approximation to the Wheeler current
sheet, and produces an impedance much closer to than that
produced by an ordinary dipole array. These connected arrays
exhibit good performance when the dipoles are short in wave-
lengths, but are much less good near half-wave. Overall, they
IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 3, 2004
provide better wideband gain than that of a corresponding un-
connected dipole array.
REFERENCES
[1] C. E. Baum et al., “Transient arrays,” in Ultra-Wideband, Short-Pulse
Electromagnetics, C. E. Baum et al., Eds. New York: Plenum, 1997,
vol. 3, pp. 129–138.
[2] D. T. McGrath and C. E. Baum, “Scanning and impedance properties of
TEM horn arrays for transient radiation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Prop-
agat,, vol. 47, pp. 469–473, Mar. 1999.
[3] P. Friederich et al., “A new class of broadband planar aperture,” in Proc.
2001 Antenna Applications Symp., Allerton Park, IL, pp. 561–587.
[4] J. Maloney et al., “The fragmented aperture antenna: FDTD analysis and
measurement,” in Proc. ICAP/JINA Conf. Antennas and Propagation,
[5] R. C. Hansen, “Formulation of echelon dipole mutual impedance for
computer,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. AP-20, pp. 780–781,
Nov. 1972.
[6] , “Current induced on a wire: Implications for connected arrays,”
IEEE Antennas Wireless Propagat. Lett., vol. 2, pp. 288–289, 2003.
[7] R. C. Hansen and D. Gammon, “A Gibbsian model for finite scanned
arrays,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol. 44, pp. 243–248, Feb.
1996.
[8] H. A. Wheeler, “Simple relations derived from a phased-array antenna
made of an infinite current sheet,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol.
AP-13, pp. 506–514, July 1965.