2020
DOI: 10.1002/mop.32332
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling and validation of a new reconfigurable patch antenna through equivalent lumped circuit‐based design for minimum tuning effort

Abstract: This study presents a modeling of a new reconfigurable patch antenna with equivalent lumped circuit. Instead of intuitive approaches, including structural changes used in the literature, the proposed reconfigurable antenna design is based on minimum tuning effort using only capacitance adjustments. The proposed design resolves impedance mismatch problem, which occurs due to the nature of using several frequencies by only capacitance adjustments rather than physical structure adjustments. Reconfigurable patch a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The proposed antenna and antenna in Shah et al 1 ) is greater than the maximum impedance bandwidth of the antennas (3.5%), 2 (9.1%), 11 and (14.4%) 22 whereas lesser than the antennas (41.5%), 1 (70.6%), 20 and (54.8%). 21 But it is observed that the antennas having larger bandwidth at higher frequencies 4.8 and 5.4 GHz reported in Shah et al 1 and Koc Polat et al, 20 respectively, whereas the proposed antenna achieved large bandwidth at low frequency 3.3 GHz. However, antenna in Chaurasia et al 21 has a larger bandwidth at low frequency (3.1 GHz) with penalty of large antenna size (713 mm 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The proposed antenna and antenna in Shah et al 1 ) is greater than the maximum impedance bandwidth of the antennas (3.5%), 2 (9.1%), 11 and (14.4%) 22 whereas lesser than the antennas (41.5%), 1 (70.6%), 20 and (54.8%). 21 But it is observed that the antennas having larger bandwidth at higher frequencies 4.8 and 5.4 GHz reported in Shah et al 1 and Koc Polat et al, 20 respectively, whereas the proposed antenna achieved large bandwidth at low frequency 3.3 GHz. However, antenna in Chaurasia et al 21 has a larger bandwidth at low frequency (3.1 GHz) with penalty of large antenna size (713 mm 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
“…A maximum gain of 3.2, 2.8, 2.6, 3.3, 2.8, and 2.3 dBi at 2.1, 2.8, 3, 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4 GHz is observed, respectively. The peak gain of the proposed antenna has a maximum peak gain of 3.2 dBi at lower frequency (2.1 GHz) as compared to gain of the antennas (1.8 dBi), 1 (3 dBi), 2 (1.76 dBi), 20 and (2.45 dBi) 22 reported in Table 2. However, antenna in Chaurasia et al 21 7A-F, it has been observed that the cross-polarization level is significantly smaller as compared to co-polarization level as predicted.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 88%
See 3 more Smart Citations