Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1536-1225 © 2016 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA UNIVERSITY- NEW DELHI. Downloaded on September 19,2022 at 11:13:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
530 IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 16, 2017
Authorized licensed use limited to: JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA UNIVERSITY- NEW DELHI. Downloaded on September 19,2022 at 11:13:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SOLTANI et al.: DUAL-BAND MULTIPORT MIMO SLOT ANTENNA FOR WLAN APPLICATIONS 531
Fig. 6. Measured radiation efficiency and peak gain results of the proposed
MIMO antenna.
B. 4-Port Single-Band Antenna Fig. 7. Measured radiation patterns results of the proposed MIMO.
Authorized licensed use limited to: JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA UNIVERSITY- NEW DELHI. Downloaded on September 19,2022 at 11:13:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
532 IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 16, 2017
V. CONCLUSION
A compact multiport antenna for IEEE 802.11 MIMO ap-
plications is proposed. At the 2.4GHz WLAN band, it pro-
vides two ports operating at 2.4–2.5 GHz, with isolation bet-
Fig. 8. Measured channel capacity results of the proposed MIMO antenna ter than 14 dB. At the 5-GHz WLAN band, the antenna pro-
operating at 2.45 GHz with two ports and 5.5 GHz with four ports. vides four ports operating from 4.9 to 5.75 GHz, with iso-
lation between antennas better than 12 dB. A prototype with
1 dB and is still within 3 dB. Further discussions on the effect of area 46 × 20 × 1.6 mm3 provides isolations among ports bet-
this on diversity performance are provided in Section IV, where ter than 10 dB and greater than 50% efficiency. Diversity and
the authors calculate mean effective gains (MEGs) that take into MIMO capacity results for a typical NLOS indoor propaga-
account the entire antenna pattern. This table also helps high- tion environment also demonstrate the potential usefulness of
light the tradeoffs between our current work and [2] and [7]. the design for WLAN applications. Our results also highlight
Removing the reconfigurable structure used in [2] allows for a that there is a tradeoff between reconfigurable and nonrecon-
simplified structure that does not require switches or via holes figurable designs in that nonreconfigurable designs such as
and hence provides enhanced efficiency since switches are not the one proposed here have a simple geometry and good effi-
required. This simplification, however, comes at the cost of de- ciency, but typically at the expense of reduced isolation between
creased performance in terms of isolation, which is reduced to antennas.
12 dB compared to 18 dB between A1 and A2 . This is because
our proposed dual-band antenna is much larger than the recon- REFERENCES
figurable one and therefore reduces the isolation between them. [1] E. Larsson, O. Edfors, F. Tufvesson, and T. Marzetta, “Massive MIMO
This also highlights the difference between our current work for next generation wireless systems,” IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 52,
and [7], as [7] does not address the effects of the increased size no. 2, pp. 186–195, Feb. 2014.
of its structure when attempting to extend it to four ports at [2] S. Soltani, P. Lotfi, and R. D. Murch, “A port and frequency reconfig-
urable MIMO slot antenna for WLAN applications,” IEEE Trans. Anten-
5 GHz. This tradeoff between isolation and reconfiguration is nas Propag., vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 1209–1217, Apr. 2016.
an important consideration in the design of MIMO antennas. [3] C.Y. Chiu, C.H. Cheng, R. Murch, and C. Rowell, “Reduction of mutual
coupling between closely-packed antenna elements,” IEEE Trans. Anten-
nas Propag., vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 1732–1738, Jun. 2007.
IV. DIVERSITY AND MIMO PERFORMANCE [4] C.-Y. Chiu, J.-B. Yan, R. Murch, J. Yun, and R. Vaughan, “Design and
implementation of a compact 6-port antenna,” IEEE Antennas Wireless
It is important to estimate the diversity performance and Propag. Lett., vol. 8, pp. 767–770, 2009.
MIMO channel capacity that can be obtained from the antenna [5] J. OuYang, F. Yang, and Z. M. Wang, “Reducing mutual coupling of
[12]. Results for complex cross correlation ρc using radiation closely spaced microstrip MIMO antennas WLAN application,” IEEE
patterns, envelope correlation coefficients (ECCs) ρe ∼ |ρc |2 , Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 10, pp. 310–313, 2011.
MEG, the branch power ratio (BPR), and channel capacity [12] [6] M. S. Sharawi, “A 5-GHz 4/8-element MIMO antenna system for IEEE
802.11ac devices,” Microw. Opt. Technol. Lett., vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1589–
at the 2.4- and 5-GHz bands for both antennas operating at 1594, Jul. 2013.
2.45 and 5.5 GHz are provided in Table II. Acceptable diversity [7] S. Soltani, P. Lotfi, and R. Murch, “Design of compact dual-band
performance is said to be achieved when ρe < 0.5 [12]. In our dual-port WLAN MIMO antennas using slots,” in Proc. Antennas
calculations, we set Γ, cross-polarization discrimination (XPD), Propag. USNC/URSI Nat. Radio Sci. Meet., IEEE Int. Symp., Jul. 2015,
pp. 924–925.
at 1 and 5 dB for modeling the indoor and outdoor fading en- [8] J.-H. Lim, Z.-J. Jin, C.-W. Song, and T.y-Y. Yun, “Simultaneous fre-
vironment, respectively, and the angular density functions are quency and isolation reconfigurable MIMO PIFAs using PIN diodes,”
assumed as Gaussian in elevation and uniform in azimuth [13]. IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 5939–5946, Dec.
The worst ECC result occurs at 5.5 GHz and is 0.27. ECC results 2012.
[9] Y.-C. Lu et al., “Design and system performances of a dual-band 4-port
less than 0.3 demonstrate that the envelope correlation is suffi- MIMO antenna for LTE applications,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas
ciently low for good diversity performance. Good diversity per- Propag, Jul. 2011, pp. 2227–2230.
formance, however, also requires that the average signal power [10] CST Microwave Studio CST, ver. 2015.08.
received by all antennas is approximately equal. Using the same [11] [Online]. Available: http://www.satimo.com/content/products/starlab
[12] R. Vaughan and J. Andersen, “Antenna diversity in mobile communi-
mobile communication channel assumptions as defined previ- cations,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. VT-36, no. 4, pp. 149–172,
ously, MEG and BPR are calculated as 12. Table II shows that the Nov. 1987.
proposed antenna satisfies the criterion of low correlation with [13] C. C. Chiau, “Study of the diversity antenna array for the MIMO wireless
comparable average received power |M EGi − M EGj | < 3 dB communication systems,” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Electronic
Engineering, Queen Mary, University of London, U. K., 2006.
12 at these frequency bands. To obtain estimates of the channel [14] C. Y. Chiu, C. H. Cheng, Y. S. Wan, C. Rowell, and R. Murch, “Design
capacity, the authors performed an experimental measurement of a flat fading 4 × 4 MIMO testbed for antenna characterization using
of the MIMO channel capacity using our 4 × 4 MIMO an- a modular approach,” in Proc. IEEE Wireless Netw. Conf., Mar. 2007,
tenna test-bed 14. From Fig. 8, It is observed that the measured pp. 2913–2918.
Authorized licensed use limited to: JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA UNIVERSITY- NEW DELHI. Downloaded on September 19,2022 at 11:13:13 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.