Vol. 27, No.

3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3472

Broadband extremely close-spaced 5G MIMO

antenna with mutual coupling reduction using
metamaterial-inspired superstrate
LIMING SI,1,3 HAIXIN JIANG,1 XIN LV,1 AND JUN DING2,*
1
Beijing Key Laboratory of Millimeter Wave and Terahertz Technology, School of Information and
Electronics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
2
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Multidimensional Information Processing, Engineering Center of SHMEC
for Space Information and GNSS, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
3
lms@bit.edu.cn
*
jding@ee.ecnu.edu.cn

Abstract: A metamaterial structure, which has positive and negative permeability over a
wide microwave frequency band, has a proposed structure that can be employed as a
superstrate for reducing the mutual coupling of a MIMO antenna system. This MIMO antenna
system consists of two extremely close-spaced antenna elements. The proposed structure’s
decoupling mechanism is verified by both the full-wave electromagnetic simulations and
experiments, and the simulated and measured results agree very well with each other. The
two-element MIMO antenna system, when loaded with the metamaterial-inspired superstrate,
shows a high isolation (S21<-15 dB) within a broad matching band of 22.3% from 4.2 to 5.25
GHz covering the 5G frequency band of 4.8-5 GHz with an extremely close edge-to-edge
space of just 1 mm (corresponding to 0.017λ at 4.9 GHz). The MIMO antenna system’s
measured largest isolation with the metamaterial-inspired superstrate is 29 dB. This isolation
is characterized by a maximum improvement of 23 dB, compared to the original case.
Furthermore, after loading the superstrate, the measured gain is enhanced by more than 0.5
dB in the whole matching band as well, with a 3.2 dB maximum gain improvement.

© 2019 Optical Society of America under the terms of the OSA Open Access Publishing Agreement

1. Introduction
As an important technology in mobile communication systems, the MIMO (Multiple-Input-
Multiple-Output) technology has attracted considerable attention in recent years, because it
can greatly increase the channel capacity without increasing the spectrum resources [1,2].
With the continuing pursuit of the miniaturization of a system platform, it is highly desirable
to arrange multiple antennas in a limited space. One straightforward way to tackle this issue is
to miniaturize the antennas, however, small antennas usually suffer from low radiation
efficiency and require complicated impedance matching techniques [3]. Another approach is
to deploy several antennas in the close vicinity of each other to reduce the entire occupied
space. Nevertheless, this method is hindered by severe coupling among the closely spaced
antennas and the associated mismatching problem that can greatly deteriorate the radiation
efficiency.
To reduce the coupling challenge between two closely spaced antennas, various methods
have been proposed [4–16]. A neutralization line has been incorporated in a MIMO antenna
system to lower down the coupling with the improved isolation, but it is difficult to control
the outcome of this technique [4]. Electromagnetic band-gap (EBG) structures have been
widely used to reduce coupling in the MIMO antennas and arrays [5–8] because of their
excellent ability in suppressing surface wave. However, the distance between antenna
elements should be sufficiently large (generally around one-half of the free-space
wavelength) to accommodate the periodic structures, in which way space might be inefficient.
Large distance between antennas can also cause undesired radio leakage problem. A defected

#351765 https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.27.003472
Journal © 2019 Received 14 Nov 2018; revised 4 Jan 2019; accepted 12 Jan 2019; published 31 Jan 2019
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3473

ground structure (DGS) [9] and an asymmetrical coplanar strip wall [10] have been used to
control mutual coupling. High isolation between antennas with an extremely close distance of
0.03 λ has been demonstrated, but the working bandwidth is particularly narrow (only 1.7%).
Periodic structures (metamaterial) [11–16] have been inserted between two radiators to
reduce the mutual coupling, which is still limited by either large edge-to-edge distance or
narrow bandwidth. Therefore, novel coupling reduction techniques are highly demanded. In
recent years, metamaterial-based superstrates [17–21] have been proposed to reduce mutual
coupling in near-field region (e.g., EMNZ [18] and FSS [19]), which is able to efficiently
improve the isolation between antenna elements in an extreme vicinity. However, these
reported results still suffer the disadvantage of narrow bandwidth (typically less than 10%).
In this paper, a novel dual-layer metamaterial-inspired superstrate is proposed to reduce
the mutual coupling in a broad bandwidth for a two-element MIMO antenna system. The
dual-layer metamaterial-inspired superstrate possessing negative permeability could
effectively suppress the mutual coupling between the two antenna elements in a broad
bandwidth of 22.3% from 4.2 to 5.25 GHz, which covers the 5G frequency band of 4.8-5
GHz. The two antenna elements can be located in an extremely close vicinity with an edge-to-
edge separation of merely 1 mm (corresponding to 0.017 λ at 4.9 GHz). The performances of
the MIMO antenna loaded with the proposed metamaterial superstrate are validated via both
full-wave electromagnetic simulations and experiments. After loading with the metamaterial-
inspired superstrate, the mutual coupling of the MIMO system can achieve a high isolation
(S21<-15 dB) in the whole working bandwidth, which is reduced more than 7 dB compared
with the original system. Besides, another advantage of the proposed mechanism lies in that
the gain is improved in the whole working bandwidth by at least 0.5 dB, with a maximum
gain enhancement of 3.2 dB. This work is organized as follows: section II studied the theory
of the proposed decoupling mechanism and design of the metamaterial unit cell; Section III
provides the numerical investigations and comparisons among the MIMO antenna system
loaded with/without metamaterial-inspired superstrate; then, the measurement and discussion
are summarized in section IV; finally, a short conclusion is given.
2. Theory and design
In order to investigate the novel mutual coupling reduction method, a simple two-element
MIMO antenna system illustrated in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b) is considered. Figure 1(c) plots the
schematic radiation field of the two-element MIMO antenna system when the port 1 is excited
and the port 2 is terminated with a 50-Ω matched load. It is obvious that the coupling is
stronger when the two antenna elements are closer to each other; meanwhile the performance
of the antenna system could be seriously deteriorated. As illustrated in Fig. 1(d), a superstrate
with a positive permittivity (εx>0) and a negative permeability (μx<0) can be utilized to reduce
the mutual coupling between the two antenna elements. When a material possesses a positive
permittivity (εx>0) and a negative permeability (μx<0) along the x-direction, as shown in Fig.
1(d), the wavenumber in the x-direction can be expressed as (assuming the time convention
e jwt ) [22]:

k = ω ⋅ − | μ x μ0 | ⋅|ε x ε 0 | =jω ⋅ | μ x μ0 | ⋅|ε x ε 0 |=jk 0 ⋅ | μ x | ⋅|ε x |

Thus, the corresponding x-component of the electric field travelling along the −x-direction
can be expressed as:
j ⋅( jω ⋅ | μ x μ0 |⋅|ε x ε 0 |)⋅ x − k0 ⋅ | μ x |⋅|ε x |x
E ( x, t ) = E0 e jkx ⋅ e jwt = E0 e ⋅ e jwt = E0 e ⋅ e jwt

which indicates the electromagnetic wave traveling along –x-direction is evanescent and the
wave is mainly traveling along z-direction, so the mutual coupling between the two antenna
elements can be efficiently rejected. The schematic of the radiation field distribution of a two-
element MIMO system loaded with such a material is plotted in Fig. 1(d) as well.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3474

Fig. 1. The (a) top view and (b) side view of a two-element MIMO antenna system. Radiated
field distribution of the two-element MIMO antenna system excited at port 1 (c) original and
(d) loaded with a superstrate (εx>0, μx<0).

Although natural materials usually do not possess a negative permeability, it is well-

known that properly designed metamaterial could have a negative permeability. Figure 2(a)
illustrates the schematic of a unit cell of a metamaterial, which could possess a negative
permeability and positive permittivity, is proposed as the building block of the metamaterial-
inspired superstrate. The unit structure consists of a patterned metallic surface which is
printed on a FR4-expoy substrate with a thickness of 1.6 mm and a relative permittivity of
4.4. Table 1 details the optimized geometric parameters of the proposed unit structure, where
the parameters are labeled in Fig. 2(a). By adjusting these parameters, it is possible to realize
a metamaterial with positive permittivity and negative permeability in the desired frequency
range. Figure 2(b) shows the modeling of the structure in the commercial software package
High Frequency Structure Simulator (HFSS) for retrieving the effective parameters. In the
simulation, periodicity of the metamaterial structure is realized by applying perfect electric
conducting (PEC) and perfect magnetic conducting (PMC) boundary conditions in the y- and
z-directions respectively. An incident plane wave illuminates the unit cell structure in the –x-
direction. Scattering parameters are obtained by de-embedding both the input and output ports
to the surfaces of the unit cell structure in the ± x-directions as shown below in Fig. 2(b).
Table 1. Geometric parameters of the unit structure (unit: mm)

p a b w g la lb
8.5 8 3.8 0.5 0.4 7 1.8
Figure 2(c) shows the simulated results of the scattering parameters S11 and S21 with the
geometric parameters given in Table 1, and the method proposed in [23] is utilized to retrieve
the effective relative permittivity and permeability of the metamaterial unit cell, which are
plotted in Fig. 2(d). In the frequency range from 4 to 5.2 GHz, it can be observed that the real
parts of the effective relative permittivity and permeability are positive and negative,
respectively. Figures 2(e) and 2(f) plot the real parts of the retrieved permeability by changing
the lb and b, respectively, which clearly demonstrate that the negative region of the
permeability of the unit cell structure could be altered by varying the lb and b as shown in Fig.
2(a). Therefore, the proposed metamaterial structure could be used to construct a
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3475

metamaterial-inspired superstrate to reduce the mutual coupling between two antenna

elements according to the previous discussion.

Fig. 2. (a) The structure of the unit cell; (b) the simulation model to retrieve design parameters.
(c) Simulated magnitude of S-parameters of the metamaterial unit cell with respect to
frequency. (d) Extracted effective relative permittivity and permeability. Parametric studying
of (e) lb and (f) b.

3. MIMO antenna design with metamaterial superstrate

For studying the novel mutual coupling reduction technique, a simple two-element MIMO
antenna system illustrated in Fig. 1(a) is considered, which is printed on a 42 mm × 26 mm
FR4-expoy substrate with a thickness of 3 mm and a relative permittivity of 4.4, as the length
(l1) and the width (w1) of the patch antenna are 13.4 mm and 15.5 mm, respectively. The
edge-to-edge distance d between the two patch elements is only 1 mm, corresponding to
0.017 λ at 4.9 GHz. Two coaxial feeds, which are located at a distance of d1 = 1.75 mm to the
bottom edge of the patch, are applied to excite the two antenna elements. The inner and outer
diameters of the coaxial feed are r1 = 1.3 mm and r2 = 4.1 mm respectively. To reduce the
mutual coupling in the near-field region of the two-element MIMO antenna system, several
techniques have utilized by single-layer metamaterial superstrate and antenna-array, such as
EMNZ [18] and FSS [19]. In addition, multi-layer superstrate has been used to enhance the
gain and bandwidth [24].
In this study, a planar dual-layer metamaterial structure composed of the proposed unit
cell is adopted as a superstrate above a two-element MIMO antenna system, the side view of
which is plotted in Fig. 3(a), where the original two-element MIMO antenna system is
illustrated in Fig. 1(a). The superstrate is placed above the antenna patches with a height of h2.
The dual-layer metamaterial superstrate consists of two identical layers of the regular single-
layer metamaterial separated by Teflon ( ε r = 2.1 ) with a thickness of h1, and each layer is
comprised of m and n unit cells in the x- and y- directions respectively, as shown in Fig. 3(b).
In the y-direction, an extra 7 mm on the superstrate is added for the supporting purpose.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3476

Fig. 3. (a) The side view of the proposed antenna. (b) The deployment of the superstrate.

In order to investigate the mutual coupling suppression by adding the metamaterial

superstrate, four different cases are studied, i.e., the original MIMO antenna system without
the superstrate (case 1), with single-layer (case 2), dual-layer (case 3) and triple-layer (case 4)
superstrate. The simulated S11 and S21 for the four cases are plotted in Fig. 4(a), with
optimized h1 = 2 mm, h2 = 3 mm, m = 7 and n = 5. From Fig. 4(a), it can be clearly observed
that case 3 can achieve a better matching (S11) and isolation (S21) compared with case 2 and
case 4. Furthermore, as what is shown in Fig. 4(a), the matching bandwidth of case 3 could be
increased largely from 4.5 to 5.15 GHz of case 1 to 4.1-5.2 GHz, which could be due to the
new resonances induced by the metamaterial superstrate and the antenna system. In addition,
it can be seen from Fig. 4(a) that the mutual coupling can be reduced significantly in the
frequency range from 4.5 to 5.25 GHz after loading the superstrate compared to the original
antenna system. Furthermore, case 3 is more effective than case 2 and case 4 in terms of the
isolation improvement between two antenna elements from around −7 dB to −15 dB over 4.5-
5.25 GHz, and the isolation within the band of interest over 4.8-5 GHz increases to more than
20 dB, with a largest isolation of 23 dB at 4.9 GHz, increased nearly by 16 dB.
To understand the sensitivity of different design parameters on the decoupling effect,
parametric studies are carried out. With respect to h1, h2, m, and n, the simulated S-parameters
are given in Figs. 4(b)-4(d) with different combinations of the four parameters. Figures 4(b)
and 4(c) plot the S11 and S21 by varying h1 and h2, respectively, with fixed m = 7 and n = 5. It
can be observed that h1 = 2 mm and h2 = 3 mm can achieve the best decoupling and matching.
A smaller h2 will cause severe coupling between the superstrate and the antenna system,
which in turn results in poor decoupling effect. If the h2 is too big, the superstrate cannot be
effectively stimulated by the radiated fields from the MIMO antenna system and the
decoupling effect is not obvious either. Figure 4(d) plots the S11 and S21 by varying m and n
with fixed h1 = 2 mm and h2 = 3 mm. It can be noticed that different combinations of m and n
can all achieve good decoupling and matching with slight difference. In this study, in
consideration of the decoupling, matching and processing complexity, h1 = 2 mm, h2 = 3 mm,
m = 7, and n = 5 are chosen.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3477

Fig. 4. (a) The simulated S11 and S21 for four cases. Simulated S11 and S21 for case 3 of different
(b) h1 and (c) h2. (d) Simulated S11 and S21 for case 3 with different numbers of metamaterial
units.

To further investigate the decoupling effect of the metamaterial superstrate between two
antenna elements in extreme close vicinity, vector H-field, Poynting vector and E-field
magnitude distributions for case 1 and case 3 on the xoz plane at 4.9 GHz are plotted in Fig. 5.
Figure 5(a) shows that the vector H-field rotates in region A for case 1 and is strong in region
C, while Fig. 5(b) demonstrates that the vector H-field is alongside with the x-axis in region B
for case 3 and the H-field magnitude is decreased in region C. On the same xoz plane, the
Poynting vector distributions for case 1 and case 3 are shown in Figs. 5(c) and 5(d),
respectively. The Poynting vector as what is shown in Fig. 5(d) is almost in parallel to the z-
axis for case 3, which could indicate a gain enhancement. In addition, the E-field magnitude
distributions are plotted in Figs. 5(e) and 5(f) for case 1 and case 3, respectively. After the
superstrate is loaded, spatial distribution of the electric field is changed and the energy is
mainly confined in the metamaterial superstrate. It can be clearly seen that the electric field
strength in region C for case 3 is dramatically reduced, which finally accomplishes the
favorable decoupling effect. Another coexisting benefit is that the working bandwidth is
broadened from 4.5 to 5.15 GHz to 4.1-5.2 GHz, which might be due to the introduction of
the new resonances caused by the coupling between the MIMO antenna system and the
metamaterial superstrate.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3478

Fig. 5. Simulated vector magnetic field distributions of (a) case 1 and (b) case 3 at xoz plane.
Simulated Poynting vector distributions of (c) case 1 and (d) case 3 at xoz plane. Simulated
electric field magnitude distributions of (e) case 1 and (f) case 3 at xoz plane.

4. Experimental verifications and discussions

To validate the simulation, the two-element MIMO antenna systems without superstrate (case
1) and with the dual-layer metamaterial superstrate (case 3) were fabricated and measured.
Figures 6(a) and 6(b) present the photos of case 1 and case 3, respectively. The S-parameters
were examined by a network analyzer (Agilent E836B), while the radiation patterns and the
gain were measured in an anechoic chamber in Fig. 6(c). The measured and simulated S-
parameters are plotted in Figs. 6(d) and 6(e), respectively. It can be observed from Figs. 6(d)
and 6(e) that the measured results agree well with the simulated ones except for a slight
frequency shift, which is probably caused by the errors in the fabrication and assembly. The
measured results indicate that the isolation is better than −15 dB and the matching is better
than −10 dB within a broad bandwidth of more than 1 GHz from 4.2 to 5.25 GHz, which is
wider than the corresponding simulated results. Furthermore, the isolation (S21) is
characterized by a deeper dip of 29 dB compared with the simulated one of 22 dB. Figure 6(f)
shows the measured and simulated gains of case 1 and case 3. Noticing that the measured
gains are in good consistent with the simulated one in the whole working band. For case 3,
the mutual coupling is reduced more than 7 dB in the whole working bandwidth and more
power is directed to the z-direction as illustrated in Fig. 5(d), thus a gain enhancement with
respect to case 1 is expected. In Fig. 6(f), it is confirmed that the gain of case 3 is enhanced
by more than 0.5 dB in the whole working bandwidth compared to case 1, with a maximum
gain of 6.59 dB at 4.6 GHz and a maximum gain improvement of 3.2 dB at 5.35 GHz.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3479

Fig. 6. (a) The fabricated original antenna. (b) The fabricated proposed antenna. (c) Radiation
patterns and gain test environment. Simulated and measured (d) S11, (e) S21, and (f) gain for
both case 1 and case 3.

Radiation patterns of the antennas are measured separately for port 1 and port 2 of the two
antennas. When one port is excited, the other port is terminated with a 50-Ω matched load.
Figures 7(a) and 7(b) plot the radiation patterns of case 1 in the xoz plane and yoz plane,
respectively. Note that the two sets of results agree well with each other. Figures 7(c) and 7(d)
plot the radiation patterns of case 3 in the xoz plane and yoz plane, respectively. Once again,
the measured radiation patterns match well with the simulated ones. In Fig. 7(b), it is noticed
that the main direction of the radiation pattern of case 1 is pointed to + 33° (−34°) when port
1 (port 2) is excited, which is due to the strong coupling between the two antenna elements.
While in Fig. 7(d), the main direction of the radiation pattern of case 3 is reduced to + 10°
(−11°) when port 1 (port 2) is excited, which further confirms the suppressing of the mutual
coupling between the two antenna elements after loading the proposed metamaterial-inspired
superstrate. The half-power-beam width of case 1 is 72° (72.4°) when port 1 (port 2) is
excited, while the half-power-beam-width of case 3 is reduced to 57.2° (57.8°), which
indicates a better directivity.
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3480

Fig. 7. Measured and simulated radiation patterns at 4.9 GHz in the (a) xoz and (b) yoz planes
of case 1. Measured and simulated radiation patterns at 4.9 GHz in the (c) xoz and (d) yoz
planes of case 3.

As mentioned before, various methods have been proposed in the literature for reducing
the mutual coupling of the MIMO antennas. Comparisons among different methods in terms
of several pivotal parameters (e.g., working/decoupling bandwidth, edge-to-edge distance) are
tabulated in Table 2. It can be seen that most of the previous methods have the disadvantages
of either narrow working/decoupling bandwidth or large edge-to-edge distance. However,
compared to the reported decoupling schemes, the designed MIMO antenna has the widest
bandwidth (22.3%) with a high isolation (S21<-15 dB) and the smallest edge-to-edge distance
of only 0.017λ.
Table 2. Comparison of different reported decoupling methods

−10 dB % working −15dB % decoupling

paper Edge-to-edge distance
bandwidth (GHz) bandwidth(GHz)
5 1.71% (5.8~5.9) 1.71%(5.8~5.9) 0.6λ
7 2.64%(5.6~5.75) 2.64%(5.6~5.75) 0.5λ
8 17.68%(2.32~2.77) 17.68%(2.32~2.77) 0.19λ
9 1.52%(5.86~5.95) 1.52%(5.86~5.95) 0.034λ
11 6.19%(2.35~2.5) 3.32%(2.37~2.45) 0.11λ
15 2.02%(4.9~5) 2.02%(4.9~5) 0.25λ
18 6.8%(2.55~2.73) 6.8% (2.55~2.73) 0.05λ
21 13.3%(5.6~6.4) 13.3%(5.6~6.4) 0.019λ
This work 22.3% (4.2~5.25) 22.3% (4.2~5.25) 0.017λ

5. Conclusion
In this work, we present an application of a metamaterial-inspired superstrate for suppressing
mutual coupling of a two-element MIMO antenna system in a broad bandwidth, where the
two antenna elements are in extremely close vicinity. After studying several critical
parameters, the proposed dual-layer superstrate structure is superior to the single-layer and
triple-layer cases in terms of decoupling and matching. The original MIMO antenna system
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3481

loaded with/without the dual-layer superstrate are both numerically and experimentally
studies, and the simulated results agree very well with the measured results. Compared with
the original MIMO antenna system, the mutual coupling of the MIMO antenna system loaded
with the metamaterial-inspired superstrate can be reduced more than 7 dB in a broad working
band of 22.3% from 4.2 to 5.25 GHz, resulting in a high isolation S21<-15 dB in the whole
working band. The measured largest isolation is 29 dB and is characterized by a maximum
improvement of 23 dB. Besides, the measured gain of the proposed MIMO antenna system is
enhanced by at least 0.5 dBi in the whole working band, with a maximum improvement of 3.2
dBi. The proposed structure provides a promising alternative solution for the design of
compact MIMO antenna platforms with mutual coupling significantly suppressed, which can
find a plethora of applications in many practical applications, such as 5G MIMO systems and
large-scale antenna arrays.
Funding
National Key R&D Program of China (2018YFF0212103); National Natural Science
Foundation of China (NSFC) (61527805); Higher Education Discipline Innovation Project of
China (111 project)(B14010); Research Base Foundation of Beijing Institute of Technology
(3050012211803); Shanghai Pujiang Program (18PJ1403200).
References
1. M. A. Jensen and J. W. Wallace, “A review of antennas and propagation for MIMO wireless communications,”
IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 52(11), 2810–2824 (2004).
2. J. Kim, M. Sung, E. S. Kim, S. H. Cho, and J. H. Lee, “4 × 4 MIMO architecture supporting IFoF-based analog
indoor distributed antenna system for 5G mobile communications,” Opt. Express 26(22), 28216–28227 (2018).
3. S. Ghosh, T.-N. Tran, and T. Le-Ngoc, “Dual-Layer EBG-based miniaturized multi-element antenna for MIMO
systems,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 62(8), 3985–3997 (2014).
4. S. W. Su, C. T. Lee, and F. S. Chang, “Printed MIMO-antenna system using neutralization-line technique for
wireless USB-dongle applications,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 60(2), 456–463 (2012).
5. Fan Yang and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “Microstrip antennas integrated with electromagnetic band-gap (EBG)
structures: a low mutual coupling design for array applications,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 51(10), 2936–
2946 (2003).
6. E. Rajo-Iglesias, Ó. Quevedo-Teruel, and L. Inclan-Sanchez, “Mutual coupling reduction in patch antenna arrays
by using a planar EBG structure and a multilayer dielectric substrate,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 56(6),
1648–1655 (2008).
7. H. S. Farahani, M. Veysi, M. Kamyab, and A. Tadjalli, “Mutual coupling reduction in patch antenna arrays using
a UC-EBG superstrate,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 9, 57–59 (2010).
8. J. Y. Lee, S. H. Kim, and J. H. Jang, “Reduction of mutual coupling in planar multiple antenna by using 1-D
EBG and SRR structures,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 63(9), 4194–4198 (2015).
9. M. A. Abdalla and A. A. Ibrahim, “Compact and closely spaced metamaterial MIMO antenna with high isolation
for wireless applications,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 12, 1452–1455 (2013).
10. H. Qi, L. Liu, X. Yin, H. Zhao, and W. J. Kulesza, “Mutual coupling suppression between two closely spaced
microstrip antennas with an asymmetrical coplanar strip wall,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 15, 191–194
(2016).
11. D. A. Ketzaki and T. V. Yioultsis, “Metamaterial-based design of planar compact MIMO monopoles,” IEEE
Trans. Antenn. Propag. 61(5), 2758–2766 (2013).
12. M. Farahani, J. Pourahmadazar, M. Akbari, M. Nedil, A. R. Sebak, and T. A. Denidni, “Mutual coupling
reduction in millimeter-wave MIMO antenna array using a metamaterial polarization-rotator wall,” IEEE
Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 16, 2324–2327 (2017).
13. C. C. Hsu, K. H. Lin, and H. L. Su, “Implementation of broadband isolator using metamaterial-inspired
resonators and a T-Shaped branch for MIMO antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 59(10), 3936–3939
(2011).
14. X. M. Yang, X. G. Liu, X. Y. Zhou, and T. J. Cui, “Reduction of mutual coupling between closely packed patch
antennas using waveguided metamaterials,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 11, 389–391 (2012).
15. M. M. Bait-Suwailam, O. F. Siddiqui, and O. M. Ramahi, “Mutual coupling reduction between microstrip patch
antennas using slotted-complementary split-ring resonators,” IEEE Antennas Wirel. Propag. Lett. 9, 876–878
(2010).
16. M. G. N. Alsath, M. Kanagasabai, and B. Balasubramanian, “Implementation of slotted meander-line resonators
for isolation enhancement in microstrip patch antenna arrays,” IEEE Antennas WirelessPropag. Lett. 12, 15–18
(2013).
 Vol. 27, No. 3 | 4 Feb 2019 | OPTICS EXPRESS 3482

17. Z. Qamar, U. Naeem, S. A. Khan, M. Chongcheawchamnan, and M. F. Shafique, “Mutual coupling reduction for
high-performance densely packed patch antenna arrays on finite substrate,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 64(5),
1653–1660 (2016).
18. P. K. Panda and D. Ghosh, “Isolation and gain enhancement of patch antennas using EMNZ superstrate,” AEU-
Int. J. Electron. C, 86–170 (2018).
19. M. Akbari, H. Abo Ghalyon, M. Farahani, A.-R. Sebak, and T. A. Denidni, “Spatially decoupling of CP antennas
based on FSS for 30-GHz MIMO systems,” IEEE Access 5, 6527–6537 (2017).
20. B. C. Pan, W. X. Tang, M. Q. Qi, H. F. Ma, Z. Tao, and T. J. Cui, “Reduction of the spatially mutual coupling
between dual-polarized patch antennas using coupled metamaterial slabs,” Sci. Rep. 6(1), 30288 (2016).
21. Z. Wang, L. Zhao, Y. Cai, S. Zheng, and Y. Yin, “A meta-surface antenna array decoupling (MAAD) method
for mutual coupling reduction in a MIMO antenna system,” Sci. Rep. 8(1), 3152 (2018).
22. D. K. Cheng, Field and wave electromagnetics (Addison-Wesley, 1989).
23. D. R. Smith, D. C. Vier, T. Koschny, and C. M. Soukoulis, “Electromagnetic parameter retrieval from
inhomogeneous metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. E Stat. Nonlin. Soft Matter Phys. 71(3 3 Pt 2B), 036617 (2005).
24. D. Li, Z. Szabo, X. Qing, E.-P. Li, and Z. N. Chen, “A high gain antenna with an optimized metamaterial
inspired superstrate,” IEEE Trans. Antenn. Propag. 60(12), 6018–6023 (2012).