Investigating the S-parameter (|S₁₁|) of CPW-fed antenna using four different dielectric substrate materials for RF multiband applications

Abstract

<abstract> <p>This article aims to examine the |S<sub>11</sub>| parameter of a multiband Coplanar Waveguide (CPW)-fed antenna. The proposed square-shaped antenna-1 (Ant.1) and antenna-2 (Ant. 2) are primarily composed of three ground terminal stubs: Terminal-1 (T1), Terminal-2 (T2), and Terminal-3 (T3), all of which have an inverted L-shaped radiating patch. The proposed antennas' resonance frequencies (<italic>f<sub>r</sub></italic>) can be adjusted by the electrical dimension and length of the stub resonators, the dielectric constant (ε<italic><sub>r</sub></italic>) of substrate materials, and their appropriate thicknesses. It will have an impact on their return loss (|S<sub>11</sub>|), Impedance Bandwidth (IBW), radiation pattern, and antenna performance in terms of frequency characteristics, as demonstrated in this article. The proposed structure based on Flame-Retardant fiber glass epoxy (FR4) substrate covered a wideband frequency range from 1.5 to 3.2 GHz, (IBW = 1.7 GHz) and from 3.4 to 3.65 GHz (IBW = 0.25 GHz). The total IBW is 1.95 GHz, at S<sub>11</sub> ≤ −10 dB with three resonance frequencies of values <italic>f<sub>r1</sub></italic> = 1.75, <italic>f<sub>r2</sub></italic> = 2.65, and <italic>f<sub>r3</sub></italic> = 3.50 GHz) for triple-band applications. The results are compared with the research work reported earlier. The proposed Ant.1 ensured, dual and triple band applications whereas the proposed Ant. 2 ensured dual, triple and quad bands applications with reasonable antennas' sizes similar to the earlier reported works. Furthermore, the design technique as well as the impacts of various substrate materials and multi-stub resonator lengths on the operating bands and resonance frequency are thoroughly explored and analyzed.</p> </abstract>

The Development of Copper Clad Laminate Horn Antennas for Drone Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar

“…It is not possible to quantitatively determine the precise contributing factors for the discrepancies between the simulated and measured S 11 ; nevertheless, several potential justifications are provided in accordance with similar antenna studies with S 11 discrepancies. This includes the simulated PEC not accounting for the CCL material properties [64], and the unique fabrication qualities and tolerances [65][66][67]. Furthermore, whilst the simulation is excited by a waveguide port, the fabricated antenna is excited by the SMA connector, which affects the contribution of connector losses [68].…”