Journal of ELECTRONIC MATERIALS, Vol. 49, No.

1, 2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11664-019-07761-y
 2019 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society

Dual-Band Microwave Sensor for Investigation of Liquid

Impurity Concentration Using a Metamaterial Complementary
Split-Ring Resonator

YOGITA KHANNA1 and Y.K. AWASTHI 2,3

1.—Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Manav Rachna University,

Faridabad 121002, India. 2.—Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Manav
Rachna International Institute of Research and Studies, Faridabad 121002, India. 3.—e-mail:
yogendra@mru.edu.in

In this article, a dual-band microwave sensor using a complementary split-

ring resonator (CSRR) is presented that determines the concentration of any
liquid bi-mixture like water in ethanol and urea in whole milk. The proposed
sensor is unique as it is designed, simulated and fabricated using a single-
metamaterial cell structure to operate at dual frequency, i.e. 2.45 GHz and
5.8 GHz using an industrial, scientific and medical (ISM) band. The sensor is
fabricated on FR4 substrate using a typical photolithography technique, and
simulated results are in agreement with the measured results. Investigation
of the sensing mechanism for impurity concentration (i.e. water in ethanol or
urea in milk) is performed by placing the sample mixture in the pipette placed
across from the sensor. As microwave sensors respond to the change in the
dielectric constant of the nearby materials, when the liquid mixture concen-
tration varies, there is shifting in the resonant frequency at which the sensor
is designed. The proposed sensor is unique due to dual-band resonance,
reusability, compactness (12 mm 9 20 mm), low cost, noninvasiveness, non-
destructiveness, and a user-friendly approach.

Key words: Bi-mixture liquid, CSRR, dual-band, resonator, dielectric

characterization, sample under test

to that pure material. So, dielectric characterization

INTRODUCTION
Sensors are one of the most essential components
in the current technology scenario and are also
inevitably used for the detection of numerous
adulterations in food items using noninvasive tech-
niques.1,2 Although there have long been invasive
techniques as well, nevertheless, noninvasive meth-
ods using electromagnetic detection have become
popular due to their fast response and reusability.
The principle for electromagnetic detection is that
every material possesses certain electromagnetic
properties, and these properties tend to change
when there is an addition of some foreign material
(Received July 3, 2019; accepted October 22, 2019;
published online November 4, 2019)
becomes significant for the investigation of the
concentration of bi-mixtures which can be accom-
plished by using a microwave sensor.3 In the
microwave domain, the design of artificially tailored
materials, i.e. metamaterials (MTM), is a noncon-
ventional approach to design sensors that have
enabled the precise measurement of permittivity
using planar technology.4–8 MTM sensors have been
designed for quality control in the food industry,
bimolecular material analysis, subsurface detection,
and chemical concentration measurement.9–11 MTM
sensors have been utilized to find the dielectric
constant as well as the loss tangent of chemicals by
dielectric characterization. It is evident from prior
research that dielectric spectroscopy is the method
considered appropriate for research on food items as
it has high sensitivity towards molecular

385
386
polarization.12,13 Sensors implemented using the
MTM unit, i.e. split-ring resonator (SRR), or com-
plementary split-ring resonator (CSRR), are found
suitable for chemical categorization and biomedical
sensing for having high accuracy, compactness, and
low fabrication cost.11 It is also worthwhile men-
tioning that designing of sensors resonating at
multiple discrete frequencies is important to
address the dispersive nature of materials where
the electromagnetic properties are dependent on
frequency.14 The multiband property of sensors can
also be utilized to sense two liquids simultaneously
using folded microstrip lines.15 Design and fabrica-
tion of multiband operation of CSRR can be done
with a single board through appropriate isolation as
well as multiple boards.16–18 The measurement
methods adopted for dielectric characterization of
micro-fluids established so far are complex, incor-
porating several steps and proper setup.19,20
The proposed sensor has a single CSRR on a
single board that operates on a dual-frequency
band, i.e. 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz. This design of the
sensor shows its compactness and also eases the
measurement process as the position of the sample
is fixed for measurement on both frequencies. Thus,
the proposed sensor can be utilized for dielectric
characterization of dispersive liquid mixtures at
dual frequencies in a single step. Moreover, the
setup of the sensor ensures that it is contactless and
reusable, as it uses a pipette attached to its center.
The modeling and electromagnetic simulations of
the proposed sensor are accomplished using CST
Design Studio.
This paper is organized as follows. The Sensor
Design and Theoretical Analysis section explains
the sensor design description, in which the theoret-
ical concept and its performance are supported by
finite element method (FEM) simulations. The
Fabrication and Sample Preparation section
describes the sensor fabrication and process of
precise sample preparation for measurement pur-
poses. The Sensor Measurement and Experimental
Analysis section gives the description of various
sample measurements and estimation results using
OriginPro 2019.
SENSOR DESIGN AND THEORETICAL
ANALYSIS
Victor Veselago projected that such material can
be fabricated with a negative refractive index, i.e.
metamaterial in 1968.21 J. B. Pendry demonstrated
metamaterial using SRRs and thin wire structures
in 1999,22 whereas the CSRR was validated by
Falcone in 2004 and explained by Babinet’s princi-
ple.23,24 The mentioned structures are used to
design filters having a high Q-factor.25 The pro-
posed sensor is designed using a CSRR which is
etched on the ground plane and a 50-X transmission
line with a centered circular patch on the opposite
side of the printed circuit board (PCB). This layout
Khanna and Awasthi
acts as a narrow-band reject filter, and the CSRR
resonator etched on the ground plane provides an
expanded fringing area for the sample interaction in
comparison with an SRR.23 As far as ring geometry
is concerned, there can be circular, square, or
octagonal geometry that can be used; however,
circular geometry is preferred because of its high
sensitivity.18 The proposed sensor is unique as it
resonates with the dual-frequency band due to the
unique design and optimization of the CSRR. Res-
onance at multiple bands makes the sensor appro-
priate for critical observations as the dielectric
constant is dispersive in nature, having variation
with the frequency of operation. The proposed
sensor is utilized to measure the dielectric proper-
ties of a material.
The sensor structure is resonating at dual fre-
quency, i.e. 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz. The design of the
proposed sensor is initiated with the study of the
transmission line as a wideband filter. The design
parameters and their dimensional details are indi-
cated in Fig. 1a and b and Table I, respectively.
This section presents the design route of the pro-
posed sensor to achieve the dual-frequency response
through Fig. 2. The structural analysis begins with
a 50-X transmission line where the width of 26the
transmission line can be calculated using Eq. 1
 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z0 er þ1:41
 87
w ¼ 7:48  h  e ð1Þ
where w, h, and er values are mentioned in Table I.
From Fig. 2a, it is seen that the transmission line
acts as a wideband filter where the insertion loss is
below 20 dB. The effective permittivity is calcu-
lated for the microstrip line26 when the width of the
line (w) is 1.47 mm and height of substrate (h) is
0.8 mm by Eq. 2
 
er þ 1 er  1 12h 1=2
eeff ¼ þ þ 1 ð2Þ
2 2 w
In the proposed CSRR, the ring structure induces
a magnetic field in a perpendicular direction which
gives the required inductance and, similarly, a split
gap between the rings generates appropriate capac-
itance. Hence, the combined effects of inductance
and capacitance generated play an important role in
the optimization of resonant frequency in the ISM
band.
Figure 2b and c show the inner and outer ring
structures with split gaps acting as resonators such
that they resonate at different frequencies. It indi-
cates that the ring radius can be optimized so as to
obtain the resonance on the desired frequency.
Figure 2d shows that when both rings are inte-
grated, resonance at dual frequency exists with a
minor shift, as compared to the single-ring struc-
ture. The circular patch, when incorporated in the
structure, provides more stable results, as shown in
Fig. 2e. The circular hole indicated in Fig. 2f in the
Dual-Band Microwave Sensor for Investigation of Liquid Impurity Concentration Using a 387
Metamaterial Complementary Split-Ring Resonator

Fig. 1. Structural parameters of the proposed sensor (a) indicate the CSRR etched on the ground plane with its dimensions and (b) indicate the
transmission line with a center patch optimized for a dual-band sensor structure.

Table I. Design parameters of proposed dual-band sensor using a CSRR

Name Value (mm) Description

G 0.30 Split-ring gap

A 0.62 Gap between the consecutive rings
d1 0.75 Width of the outer ring
d2 0.80 Width of the inner ring
L 20.0 Length of substrate
W 12.0 Width of substrate
R1 4.80 Outer ring radius
R 4.80 Radius of patch
er 4.30 Relative permittivity of a dielectric
T 0.035 Thickness of copper
H 0.80 Substrate height
W1 1.47 Width of transmission line
R2 1.50 Outer radius of the pipette/hole radius
tp 0.17 Wall thickness of pipette
er glass 4.82 Relative permittivity of the pipette (glass)

center of the circular patch and CSRR is used to
place the liquid under test in a pipette. This is the
final proposed sensor design with resonance at
2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz.
The electric field intensity distribution is shown
in Fig. 3 to study the behavior of CSRRs on both
resonant frequencies using the field monitoring tool
available in CST Design Studio. It is evident from
Fig. 3a and b that the electric field concentration at
2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz can be observed and that each
CSRR has its own electric field concentration in the
ground plane corresponding to a resonant fre-
quency. This indicates that the proposed design
has expanded over the existing CSRR designs used
for the single-band operation.
The equivalent structure of a CSRR as shown in
Fig. 4 is etched on a ground plane., The unit cell is
represented by lumped elements resistance (R),
inductance (L), and capacitance (C) in the electrical
analogy. Inductance L/2 is by virtue of the trans-
mission line structure, and capacitance CC arises
due to the coupling of the ground plane and
conducting strip of the CSRR. The losses in the
ring are given by resistance RR, whereas CR and LR
are the equivalent capacitance and inductance,
respectively, for the proposed sensor structure.
The resonance frequencies of the equivalent cir-
cuit for both ring resonators are defined by Eq. 3
given as27
1
fR ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð3Þ
2p LR ðCR þ CC Þ
The quality factor of the resonator should be high,
and it is indicated by Eq. 4
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
CR þ CC
Q ¼ RR ð4Þ
LR
Substrate material was fixed while designing the
ring resonator as FR4, which clearly indicates CC
remains constant when sensing any change near
the sensor. A change in the resonant frequency of
388 Khanna and Awasthi

Fig. 2. Scattering results of structural variation of the proposed sensor that resonates at 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz frequency (a) indicate the planar
transmission line and (b) show the variation of S11 and S21 with respect to inner ring independently. (c) Variation of S11 and S21 with respect to the
outer ring independently. (d) Changes when both rings are integrated. (e) Changes due to the circular patch. (f) Changes due to a drilled hole.

the sensor in the air is observed when the sample
under test (SUT) is placed. Theoretically, for pure
dielectric materials, the inductance LR of the ring is
not affected; only the ring capacitance CR varies
according to the dielectric constant of the sample.
For the microwave measurement at more than one
frequency simultaneously, a unique CSRR unit cell
is etched, resulting in dual-band resonance. For the
proposed dual-band sensor, the working principle
can be explained as the sample complex permittivity
is given by esut ¼ e0sut þ e00sut . Then the effect on the
ring capacitance CR due to sampling can be calcu-
lated by Eq. 5 as
CR ¼ Ceff þ esut  Cp ð5Þ
where Ceff represents the effective capacitance due
to a substrate in near space and the packaging of
the sample, and Cp is the capacitance offered by the
glass pipette.
FABRICATION AND SAMPLE PREPARATION
Standard photolithography and chemical etching
technique are used to fabricate the proposed CSRR-
based metamaterial sensor on the FR4 substrate
with a thickness of 0.8 mm and a relative permit-
tivity of 4.3 with a loss tangent of 0.0023. A micro-
Dual-Band Microwave Sensor for Investigation of Liquid Impurity Concentration Using a 389
Metamaterial Complementary Split-Ring Resonator

Fig. 3. Distribution of electric field intensity of the proposed sensor at (a) 2.4 GHz and (b) 5.8 GHz.

Fig. 4. Equivalent electrical circuit of the proposed sensor having a width (W) of 12 mm and length (L) of 20 mm.

Table II. Comparison of published sensors with the proposed dual-band sensor
No. of Resonant Fabrication/
resonant frequency measurement Resonator
bands (GHz) Size (mm2) Characterization process type

Single-band 2.30 ISM 20 9 28 Water–ethanol solution Simple CSRR7

Single-band 1.30 10 9 50 Air, Teflon, RO3003, FR4 Simple CSRR16
Single-band 2.70 40 9 60 Teflon, poly-ethylene, plexiglass, Simple CSRR17
PVC, rubber, wood
Single-band 2.10 – Water–ethanol solution Complex CSRR17
Single-band 2.00 26 9 26 Water–ethanol solution Complex SRR18
single-band 1.90 110.6 9 54.5 Water–NaCl solution Complex Rectangular
cavity20
Dual-band 6.6 24 9 15 Water–ethanol, water–methanol Simple SRR14
8.1 solution
Dual-band 1.6 – Air, water, isopropyl, ethanol, Moderate Folded
3.5 methanol microstrip
line15
Dual-band 2.45 12 9 20 Milk–urea solution Very simple CSRR
5.80 ISM water–ethanol, etc. [proposed]

fluidic glass pipette is used in the hole of 1.5-mm
outer diameter and 1.33-mm inner diameter. The
hole cut inside the sensor is the same as the pipette
outer diameter so that no additional setup is
required for the liquid insertion. Table II indicates
various attributes of the prior research for the
sensors having a dual-band sensor used to investi-
gate different materials.
Sensor results are taken when it is bare and
loaded with the SUT in the capillary. Figure 5a
shows the measured and simulated results of the
sensor with no capillary or SUT. It can be noted that
390
Fig. 5. Results of the proposed sensor (a) show the simulated and measured S21 parameter results of the bare sensor and (b) show the
fabricated sensor indicating the ground layer and its transmission line with a patch and hole for the pipette.
there is a slight divergence of measured results from
the simulated results due to the fabrication errors
and the parasitic components.
For testing, two sets of samples have been
prepared. The first sample set consists of binary
liquid, i.e. ethanol and water, that varies with the
percentage concentration initiated with 0% water
(100% ethanol) to 100% water (0% ethanol). The
ethanol was AR grade and received from West India
Chemicals (Gujarat, India). The second sample set
was prepared for urea and milk, where urea is in
powdered form and milk in liquid form. Urea and
milk were mixed 30 min before the measurement in
a glass pipette. Samples for the test were prepared
by mixing urea in the proportion of 75 mg, 300 mg,
750 mg, and 1500 mg with 100 mL of milk each
time. As per the Food Safety and Standards Author-
ity of India (FSSAI) Act of 2006 and Prevention of
Food Adulteration (PFA) Act of 1954, the maximum
limit of urea that should be present in milk is
70 mg/100 mL.28 Therefore, the sample set was
prepared taking into consideration the maximum
level as per the establishments. To get accurate
results from samples, urea particles must be fully
dissolved in milk. For measurement, the milk that
has been utilized is one having high-fat content-6,28
often termed as whole milk. The milk sample was
collected from local Indian brands with a current
date of packaging so as to reduce the effects of
contamination. Urea or carbamide of industrial
technical grade was bought from Milton Chemical
Pvt., Ltd. having a particle size of 1–3 mm and 46%
nitrogen. The arrangement of the sensor package
used to measure the S-parameters is outlined in
Fig. 6. The sample was prepared in a glass beaker
shaken well before taking measurements. During
measurement, the response of the sensor was
monitored in real time with a vector network
analyzer (VNA, N5222A) that can sweep across
the microwave frequency range of interest.
Khanna and Awasthi
Fig. 6. Measurement arrangement for the sensor using a pipette
indicating the hole drilled and pipette fitted into the hole.
SENSOR MEASUREMENT
AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
For measurement purposes, the pipette was filled
completely with the sample and placed across the
sensor hole, and a glass beaker was placed under-
neath. For each sample, a fresh pipette and beaker
were used for maximum accuracy in the results.
Whenever a new sample was filled in the pipette,
there was a change in the permittivity of samples
that caused a change in the resonant frequency and
Q-factor of the sensor. The resonance frequency and
Q-factor are highest when the sensor was kept in
free space without any sample, as shown in Fig. 5a.
When the pipette was filled with the liquid mixture,
the resonance frequency bands shifted towards the
lower frequency, as shown in Fig. 7a.
The measured values from the experimental
setup can be analyzed using a simple technique
where complex permittivity, frequency shift, and Q-
factor are related to the function given by Eqs. 6
and 7.
De0 ¼ F 0 ðDfr ; DQÞ ð6Þ
De00 ¼ F 00 ðDfr ; DQÞ ð7Þ
Dual-Band Microwave Sensor for Investigation of Liquid Impurity Concentration Using a 391
Metamaterial Complementary Split-Ring Resonator

Fig. 7. Measured results of the proposed sensor: (a) S21 parameter for the sensor with variation in water concentration at 2.4 GHz; (b) change in
resonant frequency and cumulative frequency shift with change in water concentration at 2.4 GHz; (c) change in Q-factor and amplitude variation
at 2.4 GHz; (d) S21 parameter for the sensor with variation in water concentration at 5.8 GHz; (e) change in resonant frequency and cumulative
frequency shift with change in water concentration at 5.8 GHz; (f) change in Q-factor and amplitude variation at 5.8 GHz; (g) reference and
estimated complex permittivity at 2.4 GHz; (h) reference and estimated complex permittivity at 5.8 GHz.

where Dfr ¼ fref  fsam , DQ ¼ Qref  Qsam , De0 ¼
e0ref  e0sam and De00 ¼ e00ref  e00sam . The reference value
and sample value are indicated with ref and sam,
respectively, and the reference value for analysis
purposes is taken at 50% water. The D value in each
term indicates the changes with respect to the
reference value and also indicates the trend in
which the frequency is shifting due to the change in
the percentage of the water content in ethanol. In
Fig. 7a and b, the resonant frequency shift has been
extracted at 2.4 GHz based upon the variation in
water concentration. The sensitivity of the sensor is
defined as the slope of the curve fitting equation, i.e.
y = 1.92x + 23.36. It indicates that resonant fre-
quency variation is decreasing linearly with an
increase in water concentration, and so the
sensitivity of the proposed sensor is 1.92 MHz/
percentage of water concentration in ethanol. Fig-
ure 7c indicates the cumulative Q-factor in refer-
ence to the change in resonant frequency that has a
nonlinear trend for dielectric variations at 2.4 GHz.
Similarly, Fig. 7d shows the sample measurements,
whereas Fig. 7e and f indicate extraction of fre-
quency shift and Q-factor at 5.8 GHz, respectively.
Figure 7g and h show the final results indicating
the permittivity attained from the reference and the
estimations for 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz, respectively.
Selectivity characterizes the capability of a sensor to
determine the concentration of the detected compo-
nents in a mixture. Since this sensor is analyzed on
the basis of dielectric capability, it is worthwhile
mentioning that the proposed sensor is selective for
392 Khanna and Awasthi

the dielectric mixtures. The sensor is selective for To validate the dielectric model fitting, another
the change in the permittivity values from 9 (0% nonconventional mixture is taken, i.e. milkurea
water) to 79 (100% water). where milk is in liquid form and urea is powder
Equations 6 and 7 are used to find the estimated form, and upon shaking well, urea dissolves in milk,
results, and these are expanded for different values thus altering the permittivity as it increases the
of resonant frequency and the Q-factor as given in non-protein nitrogen content. The reference val-
Eq. 10 and solved using OriginPro 2019 using the ues12 for complex permittivity for pure milk and
fitting function in Eqs. 8 and 9 for 2.4 GHz and milk with urea are observed to be in concurrence
5.8 GHz. with the estimated values.
The curve fitting coefficients indicated in Table
X
3 X
3
III are solved using third order equations given by
De0n ¼ ai ðDFn Þi þ bi ðDQn Þi ð8Þ
(8) and (9) for estimating the real and imaginary
i¼1 i¼1
permittivity for urea-milk mixture. The square of
the correlation coefficient (R2) is greater than 0.99
X
3 X
3 at 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz. The sensor is designed to
De00n ¼ ci ðDFn Þi þ di ðDFn Þi ð9Þ sense 0 mg urea/100 mL milk (i.e. pure whole milk)
i¼1 i¼1 to a saturated mixture of urea/milk. However,
during the experimental analysis, the sensor
DFn ¼ Dfr1 ; Dfr2 . . . Dfr7 started sensing a 75-mg urea sample in 100 mL of
milk due to the measuring equipment’s resolution.
DQn ¼ DQ1 ; DQ2 . . . DQ7 Moreover, beyond 1500 mg of urea in 100 mL of
ð10Þ
De0n ¼ De001 ; De02 . . . De07 milk, no change was observed in the results. Based
on the measurement results, it can be speculated
De00n ¼ De001 ; De002 . . . De007
that the minimum limit of a sensor to sense urea in
whole milk is 75 mg as shown in Fig. 8.
The curve fitting coefficients indicated in Table
III fit into the third-order equations given by (8) and CONCLUSION
(9) for estimating the real and imaginary permit-
In this paper, a microwave dual-band sensor has
tivity for water-ethanol mixture. The square of
been designed to determine the concentration of
correlation coefficient (R2) for the equations solved
water in ethanol, urea in whole milk, water in whole
is greater than 0.98 for 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz. So,
milk, and any liquid bi-mixture. This detection
the estimated values are replicas of the values
technique of a liquid mixture is noninvasive and
taken from Ref. 29.

Fig. 8. Measured results for the milk–urea mixture: (a) S21 parameter at 2.4 GHz; (b) S21 parameter at 5.8 GHz; (c) complex permittivity results
at 2.4 GHz; (d) complex permittivity results at 5.8 GHz.
Dual-Band Microwave Sensor for Investigation of Liquid Impurity Concentration Using a 393
Metamaterial Complementary Split-Ring Resonator

Table III. Coefficients of curve fitting for a water–ethanol dielectric model using OriginPro 2019
Water–ethanol Milk–urea

2.4 GHz 5.8 GHz 2.4 GHz 5.8 GHz

Coefficients De¢ De¢¢ De¢ De¢¢ De¢ De¢¢ De¢ De¢¢

a1 0.6059 0.03708 2.0560 1.34123 0.57758 0.73735 0.19671 2.4177

a2 0.00112 0.00124 0.0079 0.01211 0.03273 0.20319 0.06202 0.41951
a3 0.00002 0.000017 0.0005 0.00041 – – – –
b1 0.08881 0.10189 3.3645 3.02246 1.26861 4.52566 0.0128 4.31444
b2 0.0176 0.00088 0.0526 0.00128 1.09337 0.65853 0.42894 1.21549
b3 0.00027 0.000015 0.0054 0.00313 – – – –

Table IV. Comparison of the proposed complementary split-ring resonator (CSRR) sensor with other food
sensors
Sensor type Adulteration Methodology

Copper electrode with poly-
methyl-methacrylate
(PMMA)
Optomechanical sensor
Electrical impedance sensor
Microwave sensor
Microwave metamaterial
sensor
Proposed CSRR sensor
Detergents, ammonium sulphate [(NH4)2SO4], sodium Invasive, sensor impedance
hydroxide (NaOH), sodium-bi-carbonate (NaHCO3) and variation1
common salt (NaCl) in milk
Animal fat in clarified butterfat Invasive, time period
variation of simple
harmonic motion2
Drinking water, deionized water, hydrogen peroxide Invasive, electrical
(H2O2), sodium hydroxide (NaOH), and formaldehyde impedance spectroscopy30
(CH2O)
Water in milk Noninvasive, signal
attenuation through
sample31
Fiber content and ratio in construction materials Noninvasive, signal
attenuation through
sample32
Water in ethanol, urea in milk Noninvasive, permittivity
variation proposed

nondestructive, as shown in Table IV. The sensor has
been fabricated on abundantly available substrate
FR4 using a typical photolithography technique, and
simulated results also have better agreement with
the measured results. The measured results have
been validated, and the permittivity of unknown
substrates is also calculated by using complex per-
mittivity functions and nonlinear curve-fitting equa-
tions. The sensor’s performance is sufficient enough
to support the proposed work. However, a sensor
might be improved for multiband sensing which is
used for determining the accurate complex permit-
tivity/permeability of magneto-dielectric materials
so that the permittivity of unknown substrates is
calculated by using complex permittivity functions
and nonlinear curve-fitting equations. The designed
sensor is found to be reusable, compact, low-cost,
noninvasive, nondestructive, and user-friendly.
REFERENCES
1. M. Chakraborty, S. Member, and K. Biswas, IEEE Sens. J.
18, 2395 (2018).
2. Pallavi Gupta, Anwar Sadat, and M.J.R. Khan, IEEE Sens.
J. 14, 2930 (2014).
3. Z. Akhter and M.J. Akhtar, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 65,
2394 (2016).
4. S.P. Chakyar, S.K. Simon, C. Bindu, J. Andrews, V.P. Jo-
seph, S.P. Chakyar, S.K. Simon, C. Bindu, J. Andrews, and
V.P. Joseph, J. Appl. Phys. 121, 054101 (2017).
5. C. Lee and C. Yang, IEEE Sens. J. 14, 695 (2014).
6. M.A.H. Ansari, A.K. Jha, Z. Akhter, and M. Jaleel Akhtar,
IEEE Sens. J. 18, 6596 (2018).
7. E.L. Chuma, S. Member, Y. Iano, G. Fontgalland, S. Mem-
ber, L. Lorenzo, and B. Roger, IEEE Sens. J. 18, 9978 (2018).
8. M.A.H. Ansari, A.K. Jha, and M.J. Akhtar, IEEE Sens. J.
15, 7181 (2015).
9. L. Benkhaoua, S. Mouissat, M.T. Benhabiles, Y. Yakhlef,
M.L. Riabi, International Microwave Bio Conference (IM-
BIOC) (2017), pp. 1–3.
10. D.-K. Lee, J.-H. Kang, J. Kwon, J.-S. Lee, S. Lee, D.H. Woo,
J.H. Kim, C.-S. Song, Q.-H. Park, and M. Seo, Sci. Rep. 7,
8146 (2017).
11. S. Wang, L. Xia, H. Mao, X. Jiang, S. Yan, H. Wang, D. Wei,
H. Cui, and C. Du, IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 28, 986
(2016).
12. K. Zhao, Y. Liu, and Q. Zhang, J. Mol. Liq. 273, 37 (2019).
13. S.N. Jha, K. Narsaiah, A.L. Basediya, R. Sharma, P. Jais-
wal, R. Kumar, and R. Bhardwaj, J. Food Sci. Technol. 48,
387 (2011).
394
14. H. Zhou, D. Hu, C. Yang, C. Chen, J. Ji, M. Chen, Y. Chen,
Y. Yang, and X. Mu, Sci. Rep. 8, 14801 (2018).
15. Nikolina Jankovic and Vasa Radonic, Sensors (Basel) 17,
2713 (2017).
16. M.S. Boybay and O.M. Ramahi, IEEE Trans. Instrum.
Meas. 61, 3039 (2012).
17. S. Ramya and I. Srinivasa Rao, Prog. Electromagn. Res. 50,
23 (2016).
18. A. Ebrahimi, W. Withayachumnankul, S. Al-Sarawi, and D.
Abbott, IEEE Sens. J. 14, 1345 (2014).
19. W. Withayachumnankul, K. Jaruwongrungsee, A.
Tuantranont, C. Fumeaux, and D. Abbott, Sens. Actuators A
Phys. 189, 233 (2013).
20. G. Gennarelli, S. Romeo, M.R. Scarfı̀, and F. Soldovieri,
IEEE Sens. J. 13, 1857 (2013).
21. V. Veselago, L.S. Braginsky, V. Shklover, and C. Hafner, J.
Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 3, 189 (2006).
22. J.B. Pendry, A.J. Holden, D.J. Robbins, and W.J. Stewart,
IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 47, 2075 (1999).
23. F. Falcone, T. Lopetegi, and J.D. Baena, IEEE Microw.
Wirel. Compon. Lett. 14, 280 (2004).
24. F. Falcone, T. Lopetegi, and M.A.G. Laso, Phys. Rev. Lett.
93, 197401 (2004).
Khanna and Awasthi
25. J. Bonache, I. Gil, J. Garcı́a-Garcı́a, and F. Martı́n, IEEE
Trans. Microw. Theory 54, 265 (2006).
26. Y.K. Awasthi, H. Singh, M. Sharma, S. Kumari, and A.K.
Verma, J. Eng. 9, 512 (2017).
27. J. Bonache, M. Gil, and I. Gil, IEEE Microw. Wirel. Compon.
Lett. 16, 543 (2006).
28. T. Azad and S. Ahmed, Int. J. Food Contam. 3, 1 (2016).
29. J.Z. Bao, M.L. Swicord, and C.C. Davis, J. Chem. Phys. 104,
4441 (1996).
30. G. Durante, W. Becari, F.A.S. Lima, and H.E.M. Peres,
IEEE Sens. J. 16, 861 (2016).
31. D. Agranovicha, I. Renhartb, P.B. Ishaia, G. Katzc, D.
Bezmanc, and Y. Feldman, Elsevier Food Control 63, 195
(2016).
32. O. Akgol, E. Unal, M. Bagbanci, M. Karaaslan, U.K. Sevim,
M. Ozturk, and A. Bhadauria, J. Electron. Mater. 48, 2469
(2019).
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.