Design and Performance Study of Single and Multi-Layered Fractal Based Miniaturized Patch Antennas for 2.4 GHz Applications

Sahoo, Amiya Bhusana; Mishra, Guru Prasad; Mangaraj, Biswa Binayak

doi:10.1590/2179-10742021v20i21165

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Journal of Microwaves, Optoelectronics and Electromagnetic Applications

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Article • J. Microw. Optoelectron. Electromagn. Appl. 20 (2) • June 2021 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-10742021v20i21165 copy

Design and Performance Study of Single and Multi-Layered Fractal Based Miniaturized Patch Antennas for 2.4 GHz Applications

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The design and characterization of single and multi-layered miniaturized microstrip antennas resonating at 2.4 GHz are proposed. The miniaturization is accomplished by fractal Defected Ground Structure (DGS). The DGS used for miniaturization is a Modified Minkowski Fractal DGS (M-MFDGS). The proposed size reduction process with M-MFDGS follows the selection of the best antenna configuration and its design parameters through sensitivity analysis and pattern search optimization. Microstrip patch antennas with three different feeding mechanisms are considered here to validate the effect of DGS over the size reduction and performance improvement. Incorporating M-MFDGS in three antennas, the first one with microstrip line feed accomplishes a maximum patch area reduction of 70% among the three proposed structures with a gain of 1.43 dBi. Likewise, with a slightly higher dimension than the first structure, the second antenna with proximity-coupled feed achieves a higher gain (5.11 dBi) and bandwidth (110 MHz). Although the size reduction in the third antenna with aperture-coupled feed is a little less it has the highest gain (5.91 dBi) among all the three. All three compact antennas are physically fabricated and the simulated results are validated with the measured results.

Index Terms
DGS; fractal; microstrip; Minkowski; patch

Design1_MPA		Design2_MPA		Design3_MPA
Design Variables	Value (mm)	Design Variables	Value (mm)	Design Variables	Value (mm)
H	1.6	H1	1.6	H1	1.6
L	28.05	H2	1.5	H2	1.5
Lf1	16.59	L	32.96	L	37
Lf2	17.61	Lu	16.94	Lc	13.38
W	36.86	Lf	43.05	Lg	11.35
Wf1	3.059	W	35.2	Lf	34.38
Wf2	0.9	Wf	2.801	W	62.74
				Wc	2.3
				Wf	3.059

	Design_1 MPA				Design_2 MPA				Design_3 MPA
DGS Types	f_r (GHz) / BW (MHz)	S11 (dB)	Gain (dBi)		f_r (GHz) / BW (MHz)	S11 (dB)	Gain (dBi)		f_r (GHz) / BW (MHz)	S11 (dB)	Gain (dBi)
			E -Plane	H -Plane			E -Plane	H -Plane			E -Plane	H -Plane
Without	2.4	– 17	3.22	2.87	2.4	–34.49	5.97	5.91	2.40	–35.73	7.64	7.64
DGS	50	– 17	3.22	2.87	80	–34.49	5.97	5.91	60	–35.73	7.64	7.64
Plain	2.058	–23.32	2.58	2.43	2.2	–23.39	5.48	5.44	2.366	–30.49	7.64	7.64
DGS	50	–23.32	2.58	2.43	70	–23.39	5.48	5.44	50	–30.49	7.64	7.64
Plain	2.036	–20.09	2.48	2.36	2.19	–23.68	5.48	5.44	2.344	–28.40	7.61	7.61
DGS wire	60	–20.09	2.48	2.36	80	–23.68	5.48	5.44	50	–28.40	7.61	7.61
Type1	2.08	–22.59	2.65	2.51	2.212	–25.10	5.60	5.55	2.366	–26.49	7.65	7.65
Iter1	50	–22.59	2.65	2.51	80	–25.10	5.60	5.55	60	–26.49	7.65	7.65
Type1	2.124	–17.46	2.67	2.49	2.234	–28.86	5.66	5.61	2.366	–20.31	7.71	7.71
Iter2	50	–17.46	2.67	2.49	80	–28.86	5.66	5.61	50	–20.31	7.71	7.71
Type1	2.014	–17.35	2.44	2.30	2.146	–27.88	5.42	5.39	2.366	–22.29	7.64	7.64
Iter1 wire	50	–17.35	2.44	2.30	80	–27.88	5.42	5.39	60	–22.29	7.64	7.64
Type1	2.058	–22.84	2.47	2.30	2.19	–22.09	5.45	5.42	2.366	–30.91	7.65	7.65
Iter2 wire	40	–22.84	2.47	2.30	70	–22.09	5.45	5.42	50	–30.91	7.65	7.65
Type2	2.014	–22.62	2.46	2.32	2.168	–20.89	5.45	5.41	2.344	–27.52	7.65	7.65
Iter1	60	–22.62	2.46	2.32	80	–20.89	5.45	5.41	50	–27.52	7.65	7.65
Type2	1.97	–17.55	2.43	2.33	2.146	–19.61	5.45	5.42	2.344	–19.62	7.64	7.64
Iter2	60	–17.55	2.43	2.33	70	–19.61	5.45	5.42	50	–19.62	7.64	7.64
Type2	1.97	–32.66	2.45	2.35	2.124	–27.77	5.34	5.31	2.344	–19.88	7.57	7.57
Iter1 wire	50	–32.66	2.45	2.35	80	–27.77	5.34	5.31	60	–19.88	7.57	7.57
Type2	2.014	–18.73	2.31	2.17	2.08	–24.24	5.07	5.06	2.344	–19.14	7.61	7.61
Iter2 wire	50	–18.73	2.31	2.17	70	–24.24	5.07	5.06	50	–19.14	7.61	7.61

Design1_MPA		Design2_MPA		Design3_MPA
Design Variables	Value (mm)	Design Variables	Value (mm)	Design Variables	Value (mm)
L	16.34	L	27.66	L	29.5
W	19.11	W	27.66	W	49.11
Lf1	9.56	Lu	13.61	Lc	13.05
Lf2	10.11	Lf	36.42	Wc	0.982
Wf1	3.059	Wf	2.787	Lg	8.628
Wf2	0.4288	H1	1.6	Lf	26.91
H	1.6	H2	1.5	Wf	3.059
L1	2.9634	L1	3.77	H1	1.6
W1	2.694	W1	5.499	H2	1.5
S	1.344	S	1.88	L1	3.67
D	12.034	D	4.71	W1	11.7
				a	3.67

Antenna		Design_1 MPA		Design_2 MPA		Design_3 MPA
Dimensions		Conventional	Proposed	Conventional	Proposed	Conventional	Proposed
Antenna Volume	Inmm³	56.1×71.8×1.6	38.31×45.61×1.6	54.4×68.7×3.1	46.86×60.07×3.1	81.94×62.48×3.1	68.31×50.59×3.1
	In λ₀³	0.44×0.57×0.013	0.30×0.36×0.013	0.43×0.54×0.025	0.37×0.48×0.024	0.65×0.49×0.025	0.54×0.40×0.024
	Size Reduced	–––	57%	–––	25%	–––	33%
Antenna Surface Area	In mm²	56.1×71.8	38.31×45.61	54.4×68.7	46.86×60.07	81.94×62.48	68.31×50.59
	In λ₀²	0.44×0.57	0.30×0.36	0.43×0.54	0.37×0.48	0.65×0.49	0.54×0.40
	Size Reduced	–––	57%	–––	25%	–––	33%
Patch Area	In mm2	36.8×28.1	19.11×16.34	35.2×32.96	27.66×27.66	62.74×37	49.11×29.5
	In λ₀²	0.29×0.22	0.15×0.13	0.28×0.26	0.22×0.22	0.51×0.29	0.39×0.23
	Size Reduced	–––	70%	–––	35%	–––	38%

Performance Parameters		Design_1 MPA		Design_2 MPA		Design_3 MPA
Performance Parameters		Conventional	Proposed MPA	Conventional	Proposed MPA	Conventional	Proposed MPA
Resonant Frequency (GHz)		2.40	2.40	2.40	2.40	2.40	2.40
S11 (dB)		–17	–23	–34.49	–34	–35.73	–25
Bandwidth (MHz)		50	100	80	110	60	70
Measured Resonant Frequency (GHz)		2.413	2.41	–––	2.395	–––	2.395
Measured Bandwidth (MHz)		50	115	–––	120	–––	105
Simulated CP Gain (dBi)	E-Plane	3.22	1.43	5.97	5.11	7.64	5.91
Simulated CP Gain (dBi)	H-Plane	2.87	1.42	5.91	5.08	7.64	5.91
Measured CP Gain (dBi)	E-Plane	3.76	1.60	–––	4.85	–––	5.60
Measured CP Gain (dBi)	H-Plane	1.86	1.53	–––	4.72	–––	5.54
Simulated XP Gain (dBi)	E-Plane	–36	–30	–18	–23	–29	–31
Simulated XP Gain (dBi)	H-Plane	–38	–30	–18	–23	–34	–32
Measured XP Gain (dBi)	E-Plane	–36	–36	–––	–23	–––	–32
Measured XP Gain (dBi)	H-Plane	–38	–42	–––	–26	–––	–33
Z11 (Ohm)	Real	41	48.93	48	48.40	49	55.57
Z11 (Ohm)	Imag.	3	6.64	–0.8	1.04	–1	–0.73
Peak Realized Gain (dBi)		3.1	1.4	5.9	5.1	7.6	5.9
Peak Directivity (dBi)		6.7	3.3	6.8	5.9	8	6.3
Radiation Efficiency		44%	65%	82%	84%	91%	91.3%

MPAs for Comparison	Resonant frequency (GHz)	Antenna Surface Area (mm²) / Patch Area (mm²)	Surface area reduction / Patch area reduction	BW (MHz)	Simulated/Measured Gain (dBi)	Miniaturization method
Conventional microstrip line fed MPA	2.40	56.1×71.8 36.8×28.1	Taken as reference	50	3.24	–––––––––––
[ ⁶[6] Y. Dong, H. Toyao, and T. Itoh, “Design and Characterization of Miniaturized Patch Antennas Loaded with Complementary Split-Ring Resonators,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 772-785, 2012. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2011.2173120. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2011.2173120... ]	2.40	34×34 12.4×19.2	+71.3% +76.97%	25	–2.02	Using split ring resonators
[ ²¹[21] Indoor 2.4 GHz Microstrip Antenna, D-Link DWL-R60AT Data Sheet, D-Link®. ] Datasheet (D-Link: DWL-R60AT)	2.40	58.4×58.4 NA	+15.32% NA	83.5	6.0	NA
[ ²²[22] 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi/Bluetooth Microstrip Button Antenna, WCM.01.0151W Data Sheet, Taoglas®. ] Datasheet (Taoglas: WCM.01.0151W)	2.45	100×100 19.8×14.3	–148.26% +72.61	200	2.02	NA
[ ²³[23] Y. Liu, J. Xue, H. Wang, and S. Gong, “Low-profile omnidirectional dual-polarised antenna for 2.4 GHz WLAN applications,” Electron. Lett. , vol. 50, no. 14, pp. 975-976, 2014. doi: 10.1049/el.2014.1146. https://doi.org/10.1049/el.2014.1146... ]	2.4	78×78 NA	–51.04% NA	140	0.46	Using modified monopole
[ ²⁴[24] Y. J. Cho, Y. S. Shin, and S. O. Park, “Internal PIFA for 2.4/5 GHz WLAN applications,” Electron. Lett. , vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 8-13, 2006. doi: 10.1049/el:20062998. https://doi.org/10.1049/el:20062998... ]	2.4	47.5×20	+76.41%	110	2.39	Using shorting pin
[ ²⁵[25] S. X. Ta, I. Park, and R. W. Ziolkowski, “Circularly Polarized Crossed Dipole on an HIS for 2.4/5.2/5.8-GHz WLAN Applications,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. , vol. 12, pp. 1464-1467, 2013. doi:10.1109/LAWP.2013.2288787. https://doi.org/10.1109/LAWP.2013.228878... ]	2.4	72×72 30×30	–28.69% +12.96%	410	6	Using meander-line and trident arms with arrowhead-shaped tips
[ ²⁶[26] M. -A. Chung, and C. -F. Yang, “Built-in antenna design for 2.4 GHz ISM band and GPS operations in a wrist-worn wireless communication device,” IET Microw. Antenna. Propag., vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1285-1291, 2016. doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2015.0785. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-map.2015.078... ]	2.4	33×41 NA	+66.40% NA	240	4.2	Using monopole and inverted-F antenna
[ ²⁷[27] R. Zhang, H. -H. Kim, and H. Kim, “Triple-band ground radiation antenna for GPS, WiFi 2.4 and 5 GHz band applications,” Electron. Lett. , vol. 51, no. 25, pp. 2082-2084, 2015. doi: 10.1049/el.2015.3440. https://doi.org/10.1049/el.2015.3440... ]	2.4	120×60 12×6	–78.74 +93.03%	210	2.62	Using loop-type inductive couplers and series-resonant feeding circuits
[ ²⁸[28] M. K. Khandelwal, B. K. Kanaujia, S. Dwari, S. Kumar, and A. K. Gautam, “Analysis and Design of Dual Band Compact Stacked Microstrip Patch Antenna with Defected Ground Structure for WLAN/WiMAX Applications,” Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEU), vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 39-47, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeue.2014.07.018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aeue.2014.07.0... ]	2.45	46.4 × 46.4 π× 17.42	+46.54% +8.01%	NA	6	Using circular shaped DGS
[ ²⁹[29] C. -M. Wu, C. -N. Chiu, and C. -K Hsu, “A New Non-Uniform Meandered and Fork-Type Grounded Antenna for Triple-Band WLAN Applications,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. , vol. 5, pp. 346–348, 2006. doi: 10.1109/LAWP.2006.880692. https://doi.org/10.1109/LAWP.2006.880692... ]	2.45	60×40 34×8	+40.41% +73.69%	NA	1.48	Using a fork-type ground plane and non-uniform meander-line
[ ³⁰[30] L. Peng, C. -L. Ruan, and X. -H. Wu, “Design and operation of dual/triple-band asymmetric M-shaped microstrip patch antennas,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. , vol. 9, pp. 1069–1072, 2010. doi: 10.1109/LAWP.2010.2091671. https://doi.org/10.1109/LAWP.2010.209167... ]	2.44	64×62 NA	+1.48% NA	110	1.65	Using shorting vias
[ ³¹[31] H. -X. Xu, G. -M. Wang, and M. -Q. Qi, “A Miniaturized Triple-Band Metamaterial Antenna with Radiation Pattern Selectivity And Polarization Diversity,” Prog. Electromagn. Res., vol. 137, pp. 275-292, 2013. doi: 10.2528/PIER12081008. https://doi.org/10.2528/PIER12081008... ]	2.44	60×60 NA	+10.62% NA	80	2.85	Using complementary split ring resonators and metamaterial
[ ³²[32] H. -X. Xu, G. -M. Wang, Y. -Y. Lv, M. -Q. Qi, X. Gao, and S. Ge, “Multifrequency Monopole Antennas by Loading Metamaterial Transmission Lines with Dual-Shunt Branch Circuit”, Prog. Electromagn. Res., vol. 137, pp. 703-725, 2013. doi: 10.2528/PIER12122409. https://doi.org/10.2528/PIER12122409... ]	2.42	30 × 52.6 NA	+60.82% NA	310	0.28	Using complementary split ring resonators and metamaterial
[ ³³[33] C. -T. Chuang, and S. -J. Chung, “Synthesis and Design of a New Printed Filtering Antenna , ” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 1036-1042, 2011. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2010.2103001. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2010.2103001... ]	2.45	60×77 NA	–14.69% NA	343	–1.3	Using the parallel coupled microstrip line and the inverted-L antenna
[ ³⁴[34] W. Cheng, “Compact 2.4-GHz filtering monopole antenna based on modified SRR-inspired high-frequency-selective filter,” Optik, vol. 127, pp. 10653-10658, 2016. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2016.08.086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2016.08.... ]	2.4	50×55 NA	+31.72% NA	401	2.4	Using monopole antenna with modified split ring resonators
[ ³⁵[35] Z. H. Jiang , M. D. Gregory, and D. H. Werner , “ Design and Experimental Investigation of a Compact Circularly Polarized Integrated Filtering Antenna for Wearable Biotelemetric Devices, ” IEEE Trans. Biomed. Circuits. Syst., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 328-338, 2016. doi: 10.1109/TBCAS.2015.2438551. https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2015.24385... ]	2.4	55×55 NA	+24.90% NA	100	3.5	Using coupled stripline open-loop resonators
[ ³⁶[36] A. Pirooj, M. N. -Moghadasi, and F. B. Zarrabi, “Design of Compact Slot Antenna Based on Split Ring Resonator for 2.45/5 GHz WLAN Applications With Circular Polarization,” Microw. Opt. Technol. Lett. , vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 12-16, 2016. doi: 10.1002/mop.29484. https://doi.org/10.1002/mop.29484... ]	2.45	40×40 NA	+60.27% NA	600	2.1	Using split ring resonators and metamaterial
[ ³⁷[37] C. -T. Chuang, and S. -J. Chung, “A Compact Printed Filtering Antenna Using a Ground-Intruded Coupled Line Resonator,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 3630-3637, 2011. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2011.2163777. https://doi.org/10.1109/TAP.2011.2163777... ]	2.45	50×50 NA	+37.93% NA	343	1.03	Using a coupled line resonator and a Γ-shaped antenna
[ ³⁸[38] M. J. Duarte, V. P. da Silva Neto, and A. G. D'Assunção, “Synthesis and Mechanical Reconfiguration of Ground Plane Tilted Microstrip Antennas Based on Tetra-Circle Fractals,” J. Microw. Optoelectron. Electromagn. Appl. , vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 228-241, 2020. doi: 10.1590/2179-10742020v19i2838. https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-10742020v19... ]	2.45	NA NA	NA NA	85.01	1.27	Using tetra-circle fractal patch elements
Compact Design_1	2.40	38.31×45.61	+56.62%	100	1.43	Using Type2 Iter1 Wire
MPA		19.11×16.34	+69.80%			Fractal DGS
Compact Design_2	2.40	46.86×60.07	+30.11%	110	5.11	Using Type2 Iter1 Wire
MPA		27.66×27.66	+26.01%			Fractal DGS
Compact Design_3	2.40	68.31×50.5	+14.35%	70	5.91	Using Type2 Iter1
MPA		49.11×29.5	−40.09%			Fractal DGS

Sociedade Brasileira de Microondas e Optoeletrônica e Sociedade Brasileira de Eletromagnetismo Praça Mauá, n°1, 09580-900 São Caetano do Sul - S. Paulo/Brasil, Tel./Fax: (55 11) 4238 8988 - São Caetano do Sul - SP - Brazil
E-mail: editor_jmoe@sbmo.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS