Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Acta Astronautica
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro

2-In-1 smart panels: Embedding phased array patch antennas within satellite T
structures
Valorie Plateroa,∗, Philip Fergusonb, Raghavan Jayaramana, Dustin Isleifsonc
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Manitoba, 75 Chancellors Cir, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 5V6, Canada
b
NSERC / Magellan Aerospace Industrial Research Chair, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Manitoba, 75 Chancellors Cir, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T
5V6, Canada
c
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Manitoba, 75 Chancellors Cir, Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3T 5V6, Canada

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The increasing commercialization of space missions call for versatile subsystems that make efficient use of
Antennas limited spacecraft volumes. Smart panel technology that provides both mechanical and electrical functionality is
Multifunctional structures a beneficial solution to spacecraft miniaturization. Combining different subsystems that are usually developed
Communications independently of each other is an innovative approach to space system design. Embedding antennas within
Composites
satellite structural components reduces the overhead required for integrating numerous systems and maximizes
CubeSats
space for the payload and other critical instruments. Microstrip patch antennas provide a low profile, light
weight, small-dimension and easily manufactured solution to small satellite communication. The phased array
functionality of the antenna enables dynamic beamforming for maximum versatility. In this paper, we evaluate
the feasibility of an embedded phased array microstrip patch antenna with a hybrid composite structural panel
comprised of carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composite (CFC), Polyethylene fiber reinforcedpolyethylene com-
posite (PFC) (HDPE), and aluminium, with SU-8 as the antenna substrate. The embedded antenna panels are
designed to be adaptable for any function and size required by the end user. We present the design of the smart
panel antenna modelled using electromagnetic simulation software. The CFC and PFC materials are modelled
with approximations of their electrical properties derived from experimental S-parameter and impedance
measurements. The simulated antenna's radiation performance such as half power beamwidth, efficiency and
gain are evaluated. The performance characteristics of the simulated antenna design are used to evaluate its
application and feasibility in systems integration, and different uses in case studies including radar mapping
spacecraft, satellite constellations, and CubeSats.

1. Introduction and motivation
Designing, building, and operating space missions is a costly and
challenging endeavour for industry, academia and even government
agencies. As the functionalities and demands of spacecraft become in-
creasingly complex, so does the number of components that require
integration, and consequently the overhead costs [1,2]. One trend in
the space industry that can overcome these barriers is the miniatur-
ization of spacecraft. The CubeSat platform is one example of minia-
turized space mission technology that is driven by bringing down the
barrier of entry for testing new technologies or conducting scientific
investigations [3,4]. The effort to reduce risks, volume, mass and ulti-
mately, cost, are all drivers of space mission accessibility.
Some examples of conservation methods include the use of lighter,
more durable composite materials [5] and multifunctional structures
(MFS) [6]. The innovation of MFS benefits the continuous effort of
miniaturizing spacecraft by utilizing otherwise passive elements.
Combining spacecraft bus functionalities with the structure maximizes
useable volume for other scientific instruments and payloads, thus
adding value to spacecraft missions. Previous research in the field of
MFS for satellite applications include embedded radiation shielding
[7,8], orbital debris shielding [9], energy storage (batteries) [10–12],
electronics, wiring harness, and thermal control [13–15]. Sairajan et al.
[15] explores the various aerospace applications for MFS including
You's load-bearing antenna structures [16] and Son's smart-skin phased
array system [17]. Both You's [16] and Son's [17] antenna designs
utilize honeycomb sandwich structures to provide structural rigidity
and investigates beam steering abilities using phased arrays. Research

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: platerov@myumanitoba.ca (V. Platero), Philip.Ferguson@umanitoba.ca (P. Ferguson), Raghavan.Jayaraman@umanitoba.ca (R. Jayaraman),
Dustin.Isleifson@umanitoba.ca (D. Isleifson).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.04.050
Received 2 December 2019; Received in revised form 3 April 2020; Accepted 22 April 2020
Available online 29 April 2020
0094-5765/ © 2020 IAA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Platero, et al.
Nomenclature
S11 reflection coefficient
S21 transmission coefficient
E-field electric field
Acronyms/Abbreviations
CFC carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composite
also shows that the incorporation of MFS can reduce the subsystem's
volume by 80%, mass by 90%, and assembly labour by 50% [18].
One challenging element of miniaturized space missions can be the
communications system, which is responsible for transmitting critical
data over vast distances despite limitations on available power and
space. Antennas that provide higher gain capabilities with a smaller
component footprint can make communications systems more effective.
Microstrip antennas have thin planar profiles and are easily fabricated,
therefore integrating them with the structural panels of a spacecraft is
an ideal solution to miniaturization and cost reduction. Larger antenna
structures that protrude from the spacecraft are cumbersome and in-
crease the risk of collisions. A low-profile embedded antenna reduces
the risk of damage from micrometeoroids and orbital debris (MMOD)
and eliminates the added risk from failure of deployable structures.
These antennas can be manufactured in combination with composite
panels comprised of materials such as carbon fiber reinforced epoxy
composite (CFC), polyethylene fiber reinforced composites (PFC).
Composite materials possess the desired structural qualities of tradi-
tional materials such as metals, while reducing weight significantly
[5,6,19].
By combining the functionality of a single component to be both a
communications and structural element using lightweight and durable
materials, the integration process can be simplified, mass and volume
can be conserved, and overall costs are reduced. In addition, im-
plementing microstrip patch antennas yield higher gain capabilities,
higher directivity, and more low-profile dimensions than mono- and
dipole antennas, which are more commonly used particularly with
CubeSats.
CubeSats are miniaturized satellite spacecraft that are notably
popular with student groups and academic institutions, while progres-
sively trending towards commercial uses. CubeSats make up an in-
creasing portion of total satellite launches per year [20]. Teams often
operate their own ground stations for satellite TT&C which incorporate
amateur radio and increases the accessibility of space missions to dif-
ferent users. This paper studies the concept and design of a 2-in-1 smart
panel for a 6U CubeSat, with dimensions of 30cm × 20cm × 10cm.
2. Materials and characterization
The antenna MFS is designed at the central frequency of 2.25 GHz
and composed of a hybrid composite panel as a ground plane, with SU-8
photoresist as a substrate and copper for the microstrip elements. The
previously existing hybrid composite was designed by Emmanuel et al.
[8] at the University of Manitoba's Composite Materials and Structures
Research Group (CMSRG) for the purpose of structural radiation
shielding for satellites in highly elliptical orbits. The panel is con-
structed from a symmetrical stack-up of a thin aluminium foil, CFC, and
PFC. In order to model these materials for electromagnetic analysis and
RF performance, their electrical properties such as dielectric constant
are determined through calculations and lab measurements.
2.1. SU-8 photoresist
SU-8 is an epoxy-based polymer that was chosen for its high
52
Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56
HDPE high density polyethylene
HFSS high frequency structure simulator
HPBW half power beamwidth
MFS multifunctional structures
MMOD micrometeoroids and orbital debris
PFC polyethylene fiber reinforced polyethylene composite
TT&C tracking, telemetry, and command
VNA vector network analyzer
resolution and excellent adhesion to inorganic surfaces [21]. Gha-
lichechian and Sertel [21] propose equations for calculating the com-
plex of permittivity of SU-8 at high frequencies based off previous
models and experimental results. The second-order frequency-depen-
dent equations are used with coefficients derived from testing fully
cross-linked SU-8 in order to solve for the complex permittivity at the
desired frequency. From these equations, we calculate the permittivity
to be εr = 3.25 – j0.0504 and tan δ = 0.0155.
2.2. Carbon fiber reinforced polymers
CFRP consists of conductive graphite fibers in a non-conductive
epoxy matrix. Seidel et al. [22] show that the anisotropic conductivity
of CFRP laminates is dependent of the orientation of the fiber with
respect to the incident electric field (E-field) using microstrip devices
and patch antennas. The laminate acts like a conductor when the E-field
is parallel to the fiber direction but acts like a lossy dielectric when the
field is perpendicular. In the case of quasi-isotropic laminates where
there is an even distribution of fibers in all directions, its performance is
dependent on the orientation of the first or top-most layer. In our de-
sign, we utilize quasi-isotropic lay-up which has better structural per-
formance than unidirectional laminates, which have poor strength in
off-axis directions.
The first test involves creating a microstrip line on a foam substrate
(εfoam≈εair) and the CFRP as a ground plane, with the top layer oriented
parallel with the E-field. A length of copper tape is used on a 6 in x 6 in
square of CFRP to create a microstrip. The device is then measured on a
vector network analyzer from 500 MHz to 3 GHz and the resulting S-
parameters are shown in Fig. 1. The test set-up with the VNA is shown
in Fig. 2a. As expected, the microstrip device behaved normally as with
a conductive ground plane, where the transmission coefficient is within
Fig. 1. S-parameters for a microstrip line with a CFRP ground plane, parallel to
the E-field.
V. Platero, et al. Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56

Fig. 2. Test apparatus used for material characterization; (a) a microstrip device on a vector network analyzer (Keysight N5224B) and (b) a sample in the dielectric
spectrometer (Solartron Analytical ModuLab XM).

Table 1
Electrical properties of CFRP from dielectric spectrometer, perpendicular to the
E-field.
Parameter Value Unit

Capacitance 0.786 nF
Permittivity (εr’– jεr”) 28.23 – j5.47 –
Loss tangent 0.1937 –
Conductivity 3.04 × 10−4 S/m

Table 2
Electrical properties of HDPE composite.
Parameter Value Unit

Capacitance 0.0213 nF
Permittivity (εr’– jεr”) 1.15 – j0.00026 –
Fig. 4. S-Parameter plot for a single patch antenna.
Loss tangent 0.000227 –
Conductivity 1.45 × 10−8 S/m
Table 3
Radiation properties of a single patch antenna.
Parameter Value Unit

Center Frequency 2.25 GHz

−10dB Bandwidth 42.2 MHz
Reflection Coefficient −34.72 dB
Peak Gain 3.2 dB
HPBW 90 degrees

Table 4
Radiation properties of a 3x3 antenna array.
Parameter Value Unit

Center Frequency 2.25 GHz

−10dB Bandwidth 43.3 MHz
Reflection Coefficient −34.42 dB
Peak Gain 12.06 dB
HPBW 32 degrees
Fig. 3. HFSS 3D model of a 3x3 patch antenna array on a 6U surface area.

53
V. Platero, et al. Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56

Fig. 8. Co- and cross-polarization for the antenna array.

Fig. 5. Realized gain plot for a single patch antenna.

Fig. 9. S-Parameter plot of mutual coupling between all elements in the array.

Fig. 6. S-Parameter plot for the antenna array.

Fig. 7. Realized gain plot for the antenna array.

Fig. 10. Peak gain for scanning the antenna beam in the X and Y directions.

-3dB < S21 < 0 dB, with minimal loss, in agreement with Seidel's
fiber layers. Limitations of the dielectric spectrometer only allow us to
results [22]. The S11 plot in Fig. 1 also shows minimal reflection losses
measure up to 1 MHz. We can extract the electrical properties of the
at the harmonic resonances. Therefore, we can conclude that it is a
CFRP using the capacitance at 1 MHz shown in Table 1. These results
conductor at this configuration.
show that the CFRP acts like a lossy dielectric when the E-field is per-
The second test involves analyzing the CFRP sample in a dielectric
pendicular, as expected, and we can calculate the conductivity (σ) using
spectrometer (Fig. 2b) where it is placed between two 40 mm-diameter
equation (1), where f is the frequency and εr” is the imaginary part of
electrodes to create a parallel plate capacitor. In this configuration, the
the complex permittivity.
E-field of the capacitor is entirely perpendicular to the plane of all the

54
V. Platero, et al. Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56

σ = 2πf ε 0 εr ″ (1) parameter plot in Fig. 5 and realized gain plot in Fig. 6. Fig. 7 shows
low cross-polarization effects (< -40 dB) of the antenna and Fig. 8
Both electrical performance tests of the CFRP show anisotropic
shows mutual coupling effects between all the array elements
conductivity and lossy behaviour. Therefore this material is unsuitable
(< -22.6 dB). Figs. 7–8 demonstrate minimal parasitic power loss
for use as a conductive ground plane or a dielectric. Since the E-field in
within the antenna structure.
a patch antenna is normal to the ground plane, material properties from
It should be noted that Fig. 8 displays the Sxy transmission coeffi-
the second test are used to model the CFRP in the next section.
cients for all 9 patch elements, for x and y from 1 to 9 and where x ≠ y.
2.3. High density polyethylene composite
4.3. Phased antenna array
A sample of a composite with HDPE fibers in a polymer matrix was
Applying a phase difference to the excitations of the individual
obtained from the CMSRG and measured similarly on the dielectric
patches allow for changing the direction of the beam. The beam can be
spectrometer. The sample is placed between two parallel plates as
scanned in the X and Y directions and the angle range and peak gain for
shown in Fig. 2b. This material is non-conductive, acts like an in-
each direction is shown in Fig. 9 below. The beam can be scanned in the
sulating dielectric layer, and the extracted electrical properties at
X-direction with a maximum scanning range of θ = [-50°, 50°] and a
1 MHz are shown in Table 2.
minimum peak gain of approximately 7.5 dB. Additionally, the beam
can also be scanned in the Y-direction with a maximum scanning range
3. Antenna design and Model
of θ = [-46°, 46°] and a minimum peak gain of approximately 6 dB (see
Fig. 10).
Equations (2)–(5) below were used in calculating the dimensions of
The maximum angle with the minimum gain can be achieved by
the rectangular microstrip antenna where εeff is the effective permit-
applying a 180° excitation phase difference to each row or column of
tivity, W is the width of the patch, ΔL is the length of the fringing fields,
patch elements. It should be noted that with this phase difference, two
and L is the length of the patch [23]. We use the dielectric constant for
symmetrical peaks are obtained at the outer angles simultaneously.
SU-8 calculated in section 2.1, with a value of 3.25, and a substrate
thickness of 1 mm. The calculated patch dimensions are W = 45.73 mm
5. Discussion
and L = 36.98 mm.

εr + 1 ε − 1⎡ h −1/2 The antenna gain achieved in the simulations for a single element
εeff = + r 1 + 12 ⎤
2 2 ⎣ W⎦ (2) patch is larger than that of a mono- or dipole antenna which is currently
the more commonly used antenna for CubeSats [24]. Furthermore,
c0 2 implementing a 2D planar array greatly improves the gain capability to
W=
2fr εr + 1 (3) 12 dB, whereas dipoles have a typical gain of 2.15 dB [23]. Although
the microstrip antennas are narrow band, there exists design techniques

ΔL = 0.412h
(εeff + 0.3) ( W
h )
+ 0.264 to improve bandwidth, such as introducing slots, partial ground planes,
or changing its shape.
− 0.258) ( + 0.8)
W
(εeff h (4) Additionally, the patch antenna radiation patterns show that they
c0 are more directive than wire antennas, which have a minimum HPBW
L= − 2ΔL
2fr (εeff ) of approximately 47.8° for a full-wave dipole [23]. Implementing a
(5)
phased array allows the beam direction to be scanned in the X and Y
In order to improve the gain capability of the antenna, we imple- directions and still provides a higher gain of at least 6 dB. Having a
ment a 3x3 planar array with a total of 9 patch elements. The spacing more directive antenna might impose higher pointing accuracy re-
between elements is defined to be a half wavelength (λ/2). quirements on the spacecraft depending on the nature of the mission.
The materials characterized in section 2 are realized in an ANSYS Some spacecraft, such as those designated for earth observation, con-
HFSS model of the chosen antenna design and material stack-up. The tain payloads that already require nadir-pointing, and the antenna
array is modelled on a 20 × 30cm surface area to simulate one side of a could be oriented to point towards the earth.
6U CubeSat, shown in Fig. 2. Due to limited available surface area on CubeSats, additional an-
tenna miniaturization is needed in order to create larger aperture arrays
4. Simulation results if higher gain is required. Another caveat to this design is the allocation
of surface area real estate that is usually provided for solar cell arrays
First, the radiation properties of a single patch element are eval- for power generation.
uated, and then expanded into a planar array to assess the improved The goal for this component is to be adaptable for any use case and
performance. be available off the shelf for satellite manufacturers. A panel could be
specified for a certain frequency band and can be cut or sized accord-
4.1. Single antenna element ingly, eliminating the need for custom-designed and manufactured
components. In the event of a satellite with much higher antenna per-
Simulating a single patch element results in the S-parameter plot in formance requirements that the panel can deliver, it can also function
Fig. 3 and the realized gain plot in Fig. 4, with the properties sum- as a back-up antenna. Since the antenna is low profile and embedded in
marized in Table 3. a durable structure, it is much more resistant MMOD damage.

4.2. Planar antenna array 6. Conclusions

The initial design is expanded into a 3x3 rectangular array shown in
Fig. 2, with a half wavelength element spacing on the surface area of a
6U CubeSat. The results in an enhancement of the gain by a factor of
8.9 dB and increased directivity with a smaller HPBW. A consequence
of building an array creates grating lobes and added null points.
The properties are summarized in Table 4, extracted from the S-
The objective of this project is to develop a versatile component for
spacecraft that performs multiple functions while reducing overhead
costs for integrating components. This paper presents a 3x3 phased
array antenna design for potential use on a 6U CubeSat with a peak gain
of roughly 12 dB and HPBW of 32°. Applying a phased array allows the
beam to be scanned ± 50° in the X-direction and ± 46° in the Y-

55
V. Platero, et al.
direction, with a peak gain of 7.5 dB and 6 dB respectively at the angle
extrema. Simulation results show improved radiation performance over
traditional mono- and dipole antennas. Additionally, the low-profile
antenna has a lower risk for collisions than large protruding antennas.
This study shows that this cost-saving and versatile technology could be
feasible for future satellite programs.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re-
lationships which may be considered as potential competing
interests: Magellan Aerospace Winnipeg through the NSERC Industrial
Research Chair in Satellite Engineering.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Magellan
Aerospace or funding this research.
References
[1] National Research Council, Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space
Science Missions, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2010.
[2] D. Kramer, Costs for polar-orbiting weather satellites climb again, Phys. Today 65
(8) (2012) 26.
[3] W. Kinsner, D. Schor, R. Fazel-Darbandi, B. Cade, K. Anderson, C. Friesen, S. McKay,
D. Kotelko, P. Ferguson, The T-sat1 nanosatellite design and implementation
through a team of teams, Int. J. Cognit. Inf. Nat. Intell. 7 (1) (July 2015).
[4] H. Heidt, P. Jordi, M. Augustus, N. Shinichi, T. Robert, CubeSat: a new generation of
picosatellite for education and industry low-cost space experimentation,
Proceedings from 14th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Utah State
University, 2000.
[5] F. Christin, CMC materials for space and aeronautical applications, Ceramic Matrix
Composites, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2008, pp. 353–384.
[6] M. Schubert, S. Perfetto, A. Dafnis, D. Mayer, H. Atzrodt, Development and design
of multifunctional lightweight structures for satellite applications, IAC-18-C2.5.13,
69th International Astronautical Congress, Bremen, Germany, 2018 1-5 October.
[7] A. Emmanuel, J. Raghavan, R. Harris, P. Ferguson, A comparison of radiation
shielding effectiveness of materials for highly elliptical orbits, Adv. Space Res. 53
56
Acta Astronautica 175 (2020) 51–56
(2014) 1143–1152.
[8] A. Emmanuel, Design and Development of a Multifunctional Composite Radiation
Shield for Space Applications, Ph.D. Thesis University of Manitoba, 2016.
[9] A. Cherniaev, I. Telichev, Weight-efficiency of conventional shielding systems in
protecting unmanned spacecraft from orbital debris, J. Spacecraft Rockets 54 (1)
(September 2016).
[10] S.C. Roberts, G.S. Aglietti, Structural performance of a multifunctional spacecraft
structure based on plastic lithium-ion batteries, Acta Astronaut. 67 (3–4) (August-
September 2010).
[11] Y. Wang, C. Peng, W. Zhang, Thermal analysis of multifunctional structural battery
for satellite applications, Appl. Therm. Eng. 78 (5) (March 2015).
[12] P. Lyman, J. Olson, T. Feaver, Application of emerging structural energy storage
technology to small satellite systems, Proceedings from 18th AIAA/USU Conference
on Small Satellites, Utah State University, 2004.
[13] J. DiPalma, J. Preble, M. Schoenoff, S. Motoyama, J. Guerrero, R. Burks,
Applications of multifunctional structures to small spacecraft, Proceedings from
18th AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Utah State University, 2004.
[14] G.S. Aglietti, C.W. Schwingshackl, S.C. Roberts, Multifunctional structure technol-
ogies for satellite applications, Shock Vib. Digest 39 (5) (September 2007).
[15] K.K. Sairajan, G.S. Aglietti, K.M. Mani, A review of multifunctional structure
technology for aerospace applications, Acta Astronaut. 120 (March 2016).
[16] C.S. You, W. Hwang, Design of load-bearing antenna structures by embedding
technology of microstrip antenna in composite sandwich structure, Compos. Struct.
71 (3) (2005).
[17] S.H. Son, S.Y. Eom, W. Hwang, Development of a smart-skin phased array system
with a honeycomb sandwich microstrip antenna, Smart Mater. Struct. 17 (3)
(2008).
[18] J. Guerrero, E. Fosness, S. Buckley, Multifunctional structures, Proceedings from
AIAA Space 2001 Conference and Exposition, Albuquerque, NM, August 2001.
[19] S. Bhowmik, R. Benedictus, Performance of space durable polymeric nano compo-
site under electromagnetic radiation at low earth orbit, 2007 IEEE Applied
Electromagnetics Conference, AEMC, Kolkata, December 2007.
[20] Bryce Space and Technology, State of the Satellite Industry Report, (2017) Internet:
https://www.sia.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SIA-SSIR-2017.pdf.
[21] N. Ghalichechian, K. Sertel, Permittivity and loss characterization of SU-8 films for
mmW and terahertz applications, IEEE Antenn. Wireless Propag. Lett. 14 (2014)
723–726.
[22] T.J. Seidel, A. Galehdar, W.S.T. Rowe, S. John, P.J. Callus, K. Ghorbani, The ani-
sotropic conductivity of unidirectional carbon fiber reinforced polymer laminates
and its effect on microstrip antennas, Proceedings of Asia-Pacific Microwave
Conference, 2010.
[23] C. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design, third ed., John Wiley, Hoboken,
NJ, 2005.
[24] Y. Rahmat-Samii, V. Manohar, J.M. Kovitz, For satellites, think small, dream big: a
review of recent antenna developments for CubeSats, IEEE Antenn. Propag. Mag. 59
(2) (April 2017).