4.7 Article

Wideband Near-Field Correction of a Fabry-Perot Resonator Antenna

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION
卷 67, 期 3, 页码 1975-1980

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TAP.2019.2891230

关键词

Broadband; electric near-field distribution; electromagnetic bandgap (EBG) resonator antenna; evolutionary algorithm; Fabry-Perot resonator antenna (FPRA); high gain; near-field correcting structure (NFCS); partially reflecting surface (PRS); particle swarm optimization (PSO); phase correcting structure (PCS); phase correction; resonant cavity antenna; wideband

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A systematic approach to correcting electric near-field phase and magnitude over a wideband for Fabry-Perot resonator antennas (FPRAs) is presented. Unlike all other unit-cell-based near-field correction techniques for FPRAs, which merely focus on phase correction at a single frequency, this method delivers a compact near-field correcting structure (NFCS) with a wide operational bandwidth of 40%. In this novel approach, a time-average Poynting vector in conjunction with a phase gradient analysis is utilized to suggest the initial configuration of the NFCS for wideband performance. A simulation-driven optimization algorithm is then implemented to find the thickness of each correcting region, defined by the gradient analysis, to complete the NFCS design. According to the predicted and measured results, the phase and magnitude distributions of the electric near field have been greatly improved, resulting in a high aperture efficiency of 70%. The antenna under NFCS loading has a peak measured directivity of 21.6 dB, a 3 dB directivity bandwidth of 41% and a 10 dB return loss bandwidth of 46%, which covers the directivity bandwidth. The diameter of the proposed NFCS is 3.8 lambda(0c), which is around half that of all the other unit-cell-based phase-correcting structures, where lambda(0c) is the free-space wavelength at the central frequency of the NFCS (13.09 GHz).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据