Oraizi 2011
Oraizi 2011
Oraizi 2011
10, 2011 67
I. INTRODUCTION
Fig. 7. Computer simulation results and measurement data for the reflection
coefficient.
Fig. 5. Structure of proposed fractal antenna. III. SIMULATION AND MEASUREMENT RESULTS
A prototype model of the proposed antenna is fabricated and
is shown in Fig. 6. The computer simulation results and mea-
shapes in order to obtain an approximately linear phase varia- surement data for the reflection coefficient as are shown in
tion for for the transmission and reception of narrow pulses Fig. 7. Observe that the bandwidth of the proposed antenna (for
in UWB systems. The group delay should be nearly constant the definition of 10 dB) is from 1 to 15 GHz, which may cover
across the frequency band [11]. As the iteration of fractal the UWB frequency range. The comparison of of the first
geometry increases, its resonance frequency decreases, which and second iterations of the Giusepe Peano fractal geometry is
may lead to an effective antenna miniaturization. However, drawn in Fig. 8. Observe that the reduction of resonance fre-
for iterations higher than the second iteration, the reduction quency of the second iteration is quite negligible relative to that
of operating frequency is not achievable since the antenna of the first iteration. Furthermore, the bandwidth at the reso-
design becomes quite complicated and its fabrication becomes nance frequency of the second iteration is quite narrower than
difficult. The configuration of Giusepe Peano fractal geometry that of the first iteration.
becomes quite unwieldy for iterations higher than the second The VSWR for the proposed antenna for iterations 1 and 2 is
iteration. shown in Fig. 9. The gain versus frequency response for itera-
The selected substrate is FR4 with dielectric constant tions 1 and 2 are drawn in Fig. 10, which shows an acceptable
, substrate thickness mm, and loss tangent antenna gain in the UWB range. The radiation efficiency of the
. The metallic square patch has dimensions 20 13 mm . fractal antenna versus frequency for iterations 1 and 2 is drawn
The feed line is designed for a 50- characteristic impedance, in Fig. 11, which is quite good.
where its width is 3 mm. The feed line is tapered for impedance The comparison of antenna characteristics (namely gain,
matching. return loss, radiation efficiency, and SWR) of the first and
The ground plane is a combination of rectangular and el- second iterations of the Giusepe Peano fractal indicates that
liptical sheets. Its dimensions are optimized by the HFSS12 the first iteration has more desirable characteristics and also a
ORAIZI AND HEDAYATI: MINIATURIZED UWB MONOPOLE MICROSTRIP ANTENNA DESIGN 69
Fig. 11. Radiation efficiency of the fractal antenna versus frequency for
Fig. 8. Comparison of return losses of the fractal iterations 1 and 2. iterations 1 and 2.
Fig. 12. Real and imaginary parts of the antenna input impedance versus
frequency.
Fig. 10. Gain versus frequency of the proposed antenna for iterations 1 and 2.
Fig. 16. Comparison of return losses of the Giusepe fractal with other common
fractals.
IV. CONCLUSION
A monopole square patch antenna is introduced by shaping
its edges into the form of a Giusepe Peano fractal and its sur-
face area as a Sierpinski carpet fractal. Its feeding system is a
combination of a microstrip line and a matching section over a
semi-elliptical ground plane. The proposed antenna has an om-
nidirectional radiation pattern, a good gain, and high efficiency.
Consequently, it is shown that different combinations of fractal
geometries may be introduced for the design of antennas for var-
ious systems such as WLAN and UWB.
REFERENCES
[1] B. B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature. San Francisco,
CA: Freeman, 1983, pp. 152–180.
[2] D. H. Werner and R. Mittra, Frontiers in Electromagnetics. Piscat-
away, NJ: IEEE Press, 2000, pp. 48–81.
[3] J. P. Gianvittori and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “Fractal antenna: A novel
antenna miniaturization technique, and applications,” IEEE Antennas
Fig. 14. Measured radiation patterns of the proposed antenna at (a) 3, (b) 8, Propag. Mag., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 20–36, Feb. 2002.
and (c) 12 GHz. [4] C. Puente_Baliaada, J. Romeu, and R. Cardama, “On the behavior
of the Sierpinski multiband fractal antenna,” IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propag., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 517–524, Apr. 1998.
[5] D. H. Werner and S. Ganguly, “An overview of fractal antenna engi-
neering research,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 45, no. 1, pp.
38–57, Feb. 2003.
[6] C. Borja and J. Romeu, “On the behavior of Koch island fractal
boundary microstrip patch antenna,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1281–1291, Jun. 2003.
[7] K. T. Mustafa, “Combined fractal dipole wire antenna,” in Proc. 2nd
Int. ITG Conf. Antennas, Munich, Germany, Mar. 2007, pp. 176–180.
Fig. 15. Different fractal shapes. [8] S. B. Park, S. M. Kim, and W. G. Yang, “Wideband circular polariza-
tion patch antenna for access point of 802.11B, G WLAN,” Microw.
Opt. Technol. Lett., vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 46–52, Apr. 2008.
[9] H.-Q. Cheng, L.-B. Tian, and B. J. Hu, “Compact circulary polarized
the transmitted electrical pulse. Therefore, the antenna group square microstrip fractal antenna with symmetrical T-slits,” in Proc.
WiCom, 2007, pp. 613–616.
delay is approximately constant within the frequency band [10] M. Al-Husseini, A. Ramdan, A. EL-Hajj, and K. Y. Kabanon, “Design
of interest. The measured radiation patterns in the E-plane of a compact and low-cost fractal based UWB PCB antenna,” in Proc.
and H-plane of the antenna are shown in Fig. 14, where the 26th Nat. Radio Sci. Conf., Mar. 2009, pp. 1–8.
[11] H. Kimouche, D. Abed, B. Atrouz, and R. Aksas, “Bandwidth enhance-
solid lines are the co-polarization patterns and the dash lines ment of rectangular monopole antenna using modified semi-elliptical
are cross-polarization patterns. The configurations of Koch, ground plane and slots,” Microw. Opt. Technol. Lett., vol. 52, no. 1, pp.
Minkowski, T-type, and Giusepe Peano fractal geometries are 54–58, Jan. 2010.