| Literature DB >> 30347784 |
Xavier Begaud1, Anne Claire Lepage2, Stefan Varault3, Michel Soiron4, André Barka5.
Abstract
In order to extend the performance of radar absorbing materials, it is necessary to design new structures with wideband properties and large angles of incidence which are also as thin as possible. The objective of this work, realized within the framework of the SAFAS project (self-complementary surface with low signature) is, then, the development of an ultra-wideband microwave absorber of low thickness. The design of such material requires a multilayered structure composed with dielectric layers, metasurfaces, and wide-angle impedance matching layers. This solution has been realized with on-the-shelf materials, and measured to validate the concept. At normal incidence, the bandwidth ratio, defined for a magnitude of the reflection coefficient below -10 dB, is 4.7:1 for an absorber with a total thickness of 11.5 mm, which corresponds to λ/7 at the lowest operating frequency. For an incidence of 60°, this bandwidth ratio is reduced to 3.8:1, but the device remains ultra-wideband.Entities:
Keywords: anti-phase metasurface; electromagnetic wave absorbers based on multilayer structures; frequency selective surface; metamaterial absorber; metasurface; self-complementary structures; ultra-wideband microwave absorber; wide-angle impedance matching layers; wide-angle metamaterial absorber
Year: 2018 PMID: 30347784 PMCID: PMC6213788 DOI: 10.3390/ma11102045
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1(a) Multilayer absorber description (unit cell); (b) Unit cell of the checkerboard with interconnected resistors.
Figure 2Transmission line (TL) model of the absorber corresponding to Figure 1a.
Figure 3Description and nomenclature of the different layers of the ultra-wideband absorber.
Figure 4Prototype of the manufactured absorber.
Figure 5Comparison between the simulated and measured magnitudes of the reflection coefficient (dB) as a function of frequency at normal incidence.
Figure 6Comparison between the simulated and measured magnitudes of the reflection coefficient (dB) as a function of frequency with two angles of incidence 40° and 60° for TE polarization.
Figure 7Comparison between the simulated and measured magnitudes of the reflection coefficient (dB) as a function of frequency with two angles of incidence 40° and 60° for TM polarization.