| Literature DB >> 31947533 |
Samir Salem Al-Bawri1,2, Md Shabiul Islam1, Hin Yong Wong1, Mohd Faizal Jamlos3, Adam Narbudowicz4, Muzammil Jusoh5, Thennarasan Sabapathy5, Mohammad Tariqul Islam6.
Abstract
A multiband coplanar waveguide (CPW)-fed antenna loaded with metamaterial unit cell for GSM900, WLAN, LTE-A, and 5G Wi-Fi applications is presented in this paper. The proposed metamaterial structure is a combination of various symmetric split-ring resonators (SSRR) and its characteristics were investigated for two major axes directions at (x and y-axis) wave propagation through the material. For x-axis wave propagation, it indicates a wide range of negative refractive index in the frequency span of 2-8.5 GHz. For y-axis wave propagation, it shows more than 2 GHz bandwidth of near-zero refractive index (NZRI) property. Two categories of the proposed metamaterial plane were applied to enhance the bandwidth and gain. The measured reflection coefficient (S11) demonstrated significant bandwidths increase at the upper bands by 4.92-6.49 GHz and 3.251-4.324 GHz, considered as a rise of 71.4% and 168%, respectively, against the proposed antenna without using metamaterial. Besides being high bandwidth achieving, the proposed antenna radiates bi-directionally with 95% as the maximum radiation efficiency. Moreover, the maximum measured gain reaches 6.74 dBi by a 92.57% improvement compared with the antenna without using metamaterial. The simulation and measurement results of the proposed antenna show good agreement.Entities:
Keywords: DNG metamaterial; coplanar waveguide (CPW) antenna; multiband; near-zero refractive index (NZRI); wideband
Year: 2020 PMID: 31947533 PMCID: PMC7014108 DOI: 10.3390/s20020457
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Comparison of a designed antenna with others in the state of the art.
| Reference | Size (mm2) | Operating Bands (GHz) | Technique | Max. BW (%) | Max. Gain(dBi) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 45.0 × 45.5 | (0.898–0.929), (1.540–1.580), (1.956–2.005) | CPW-Fed | 02.47 | 2.72 |
| [ | 30.0 × 30.0 | (0.918–0.927), (2.440–2.460), (3.520–3.620), (5.700–6.270) | U, L, F-shaped | 09.50 | 5.37 |
| [ | 18.0 × 35.0 | (1.660–2.710), (2.950–4.540), (5.020–6.100) | CPW-Fed | -- | 5.27 |
| [ | 30.0 × 40.0 | (2.400–2.700), (3.320–4.000), (4.760–5.800) | CPW-Fed & Slots | 19.70 | -- |
| [ | 18.0 × 30.0 | (1.765–2.695), (3.010–3.910), (5.110–6.055) | CPW-Fed | 16.90 | 4.75 |
| [ | 50.0 × 35.0 | (1.680–2.040), (3.030–4.100), (4.760–6.840), (7.620–8.420) | I-shaped strips | 35.80 | -3.50 |
| [ | 50.0 × 69.0 | (1.430–1.600), (1.940–2.100), (2.400–2.570), (3.450–3.600) | L-shaped stub | 06.80 | 1.38 |
| [ | 85.0 × 125 | (0.870–1.010), (1.720–1.960), (2.280–2.830), (5.710–6.380) | L-shaped radiator | 11.10 | 5.82 |
| [ | 40.0 × 20.0 | (1.540–1.610), (2.310–2.720), (3.100–3.750), (5.030–5.950) | Asymmetric coplanar strip | 16.70 | 3.50 |
| [ | 24.8 × 30.0 | (2.350–2.450), (2.630–2.760), (4.440–4.920), (5.420–5.770), (8.680–8.890) | Metamaterial | 10.25 | 3.01 |
| [ | 32.0 × 38.0 | (2.400–2.600), (2.900–3.100), (3.300–3.500), (4.000–8.300) | Metamaterial | 11.11 | 3.80 |
| [ | 48.0 × 48.0 | (1.710–1.880), (1.880–2.200), (3.400–3.800) | Metamaterial | 13.00 | 4.72 |
| [ | 125 × 125 | (1.380–1.395), (1.570–1.580) | Artificial magnetic conductor (AMC) | 02.00 | 7.00 |
| This work | 78.6 × 42.5 | (0.865–1.060), (2.240–2.520), (3.250–4.310), (4.900–6.500) | NZRI & DNG Metamaterial | 28.00 | 6.72 |
Figure 1Metamaterial unit cell: (a) unit cell structure with g = 0.5 mm, r1 = 2.9 mm, r2 = 1.9 mm, r3 = 0.9 mm; (b) simulation set-up in the x-axis; (c) simulation set-up in the y-axis.
Figure 2Surface current distribution at (a) 2.4; (b) 3.5; (c) 5.5 and (d) 10 GHz.
Figure 3Simulated metamaterial reflection and transmission coefficients: (a) x-axis, (b) y-axis.
Figure 4Metamaterial simulated refractive index of 1 × 1 unit cell: (a) x-axis; (b) y-axis.
Figure 5Metamaterial simulated results at x-axis: (a) permittivity; (b) permeability; and (c) impedance.
Figure 6Metamaterial simulated result at y-axis: (a) permittivity; (b) permeability and (c) impedance.
Figure 7Metamaterial simulated refractive index results of the 1 × 1, 1 × 2 and 2 × 2 array structures: (a) x- axis; (b) y- axis.
Figure 8Geometry of the proposed antenna: (a) front view, (b) 3D view, (c) back view, (d) suspended separator metamaterial (MTM) layer.
Parameter dimensions of the proposed antenna.
| Para. | Value (mm) | Para. | Value (mm) | Para. | Value (mm) | Para. | Value (mm) | Para. | Value (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 78.6 |
| 0.766 |
| 5.53 |
| 37.1 |
| 0.42 |
|
| 42.5 |
| 1.108 |
| 6.506 |
| 2.44 |
| 1 |
|
| 9.87 |
| 3.4 |
| 11 |
| 19.14 | ||
|
| 14.4 |
| 8.86 |
| 15 |
| 2 | ||
|
| 55 |
| 88 |
| 11.5 |
| 2 |
Figure 9Simulated surface current intensity at: (a) 900; (b) 2.4; (c) 3.5; and (d) 5.5 GHz.
Figure 10Simulated reflection coefficient for different slot length at: (a) SL = 15 mm, SL = 20 mm; (b) SL = 25 mm, and SL = 30 mm.
Figure 11The fabricated prototype of the proposed coplanar waveguide (CPW) antenna: (a) 3D view; (b) front view; (c) back view with MTM; and (d) MTM super substrate structure.
Figure 12Simulated reflection coefficient (S11) with and without MTM.
Figure 13Simulated and measured reflection coefficient (S11) with MTM.
Figure 14A measured and simulated gain of proposed CPW antenna with and without MTM.
Figure 15The proposed CPW antenna efficiency with and without MTM.
Summary of the antenna performance.
|
| 0.9 | 2.4 | 3.5 | 5.5 |
|
| 1.89 | 5.05 | 6.74 | 5.98 |
|
| 20.26 | 11.76 | 27.81 | 28 |
|
| 62 | 71 | 95 | 83 |
|
| 78.6 × 42.5 × 0.035 m3 | |||
Figure 16Simulated and measured electric field radiation patterns of the proposed CPW antenna at: the (a) XY-Plane; (b) YZ-Plane.