| Literature DB >> 32933077 |
Sharadindu Gopal Kirtania1, Alan Wesley Elger1, Md Rabiul Hasan1, Anna Wisniewska1, Karthik Sekhar2, Tutku Karacolak1, Praveen Kumar Sekhar1.
Abstract
The field of flexible antennas is witnessing an exponential growth due to the demand for wearable devices, Internet of Things (IoT) framework, point of care devices, personalized medicine platform, 5G technology, wireless sensor networks, and communication devices with a smaller form factor to name a few. The choice of non-rigid antennas is application specific and depends on the type of substrate, materials used, processing techniques, antenna performance, and the surrounding environment. There are numerous design innovations, new materials and material properties, intriguing fabrication methods, and niche applications. This review article focuses on the need for flexible antennas, materials, and processes used for fabricating the antennas, various material properties influencing antenna performance, and specific biomedical applications accompanied by the design considerations. After a comprehensive treatment of the above-mentioned topics, the article will focus on inherent challenges and future prospects of flexible antennas. Finally, an insight into the application of flexible antenna on future wireless solutions is discussed.Entities:
Keywords: 3-D printing; Internet of Things (IoT), implantable antennas; bending analysis; flexible antenna; ingestible antennas; specific absorption rate (SAR); wearable antenna
Year: 2020 PMID: 32933077 PMCID: PMC7570180 DOI: 10.3390/mi11090847
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Connection architecture between 5G and Internet of Things (IoT). Reprinted with permission from Ref [5].
Figure 2Application areas for flexible electronics. Reprinted with permission from Ref [9].
Figure 3Schematic of antennas with different conducting materials. (a) Polymer ultra-wideband antenna using poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate (PEDOT:PSS) [42], (b) platinum-decorated carbon nanoparticle/polyaniline hybrid paste for flexible wideband dipole tag-antenna [30], and (c) a stretchable microstrip patch antenna composed of nanowire (AgNW)/polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) flexible conductor [37].
Conductive materials and their electrical conductivity values.
| Materials Types | Conductive Materials | Conductivity, |
|---|---|---|
| Metal nanoparticles | Ag nanoparticle [ | 2.173 × 107 |
| Cu nanoparticle [ | 1 × 106 | |
| Conductive Polymers | PEDOT:PSS [ | 100–1500 |
| Polyaniline (Pani) [ | 5 | |
| Polypyrrole (PPy) [ | 40–200 | |
| Conductive Polymers with additives | C nanotube [ | 4000–7000 |
| PANI/CCo Composite [ | 7.3 × 103 | |
| AgNW/PDMS [ | 8130 | |
| Ag flakes + Fluorine Rubber [ | 8.5 × 104 | |
| Graphene Based materials | Nanoflakes [ | 6 × 105 |
| Paper [ | 4.2 × 105 | |
| Meshed Fabric [ | 2 × 105 | |
| Liquid Metal | Eutectic GaIn [ | 3.4 × 106 |
Commonly used flexible substrates with their dielectric constant, loss tangent, and thickness.
| Substrates | Dielectric Constant
| Dielectric Loss
| Thickness (mm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET [ | 3 | 0.008 | 0.140 | |
| PEN [ | 2.9 | 0.025 | 0.125 | |
| Polyimide [ | 2.91 | 0.005 | 0.2 | |
| PDMS-MCT [ | 3.8 | 0.015 | - | |
| PDMS [ | 2.65 | 0.02 | - | |
| PDMS with glass microsphere [ | 1.85 | 0.014 | - | |
| PDMS with phenolic microsphere [ | 2.24 | 0.022 | - | |
| PDMS with silicate microsphere [ | 2.45 | 0.02 | - | |
| Paper (Kodak Photo paper) [ | 2.85 | 0.05 | 0.254 | |
| Liquid Crystal Polymer (ULTRALIM 3850) [ | 2.9 | 0.0025 | 0.1 | |
| Wearable antenna substrates | Fleece Fabric [ | 1.25 | - | 2.56 |
| Cordura [ | 1.1–1.7 | 0.0098 | 0.5 | |
| Woolen felt [ | 1.16 | 0.02 | 3.5 | |
| Felt [ | 1.3 | 0.02 | 1.1 | |
| Cotton/Polyester [ | 1.6 | 0.02 | 2.808 | |
Figure 4Fabricated antenna prototypes on: (a) polyethylene terephthalate (PET) [67], (b) polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) [70], (c) Polyimide [59], (d) liquid crystal polymer (LCP) [82], and (e) paper [80] substrates.
Figure 5Overview of the inkjet printing process for antenna fabrication. (a) Flowchart of the inkjet printing process [91] and (b) Dimatix Materials Printer, DMP-2800 (FUJIFILM Dimatix Inc., Santa Clara, CA, USA), and the PC that is used to control the printer.
Figure 6Schematic of the screen-printed antenna. (a) Fabrication process for parasitic beam-switching millimeter-wave antenna array [104] and (b) screen printed graphene flakes based wideband elliptical dipole antenna prototype [105].
Figure 7Examples of D printed antennas. (a) Square patch antenna on NinjaFlex substrate (dimensions in mm A = 65, B = 55, L = 35.8, w = 3, g = 1, t = 7) [107], (b) brush-painted wearable antenna on a 3-D printed substrate [112], (c) button-shaped 3-D radio-frequency identification (RFID) tag antenna [111], and (d) 3-D printed flexible inverted-F antenna (IFA) [113].
Figure 8Example of wet etching based antenna structure. (a) Transparent and flexible antenna fabrication process: (i) polyimide (PI) substrate cleaning; (ii) masking. (iii) deposition; and (iv) mask removal [116] and (b) fabricated indium–zinc–tin oxide (IZTO)/Ag/IZTO (IAI) antenna [116] and (b) Cu thin film RFID ultra-high frequency (UHF) antenna on PET using photolithography and sputtering [118].
Figure 9Antennas fabricated using the substrate integrated waveguide (SIW) method. (a) The prototype of the SIW antenna using conductive fabrics [122] and (b) prototype of the circularly polarized SIW antenna [121].
Figure 10Embroidery and stitching based flexible antennas. (a) Novel mixed embroidered-woven textile integrated waveguide (TIW) antenna: top and bottom views [128], (b) embroidery metamaterial antenna manufacturing process with stitch pattern embroidery layout and embroidered antennas [129], and (c) fabricated e-textile based on a slotted patch antenna created with a sewing machine and copper tape [127].
Figure 11Flexible antennas for applications above 12 GHz. (a) Graphene antenna prototype for 5G applications [179], (b) millimeter-wave planar antenna prototype on PDMS substrate [185], and (c) electromagnetic bandgap (EBG) backed millimeter-wave multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) antenna for wearable use [186].
Figure 12Miniaturized antennas. (a) Miniaturization of EBG-backed monopole antenna with reflection coefficient [212], (b) fabricated cylindrical conformal array antenna with photonic bandgap (PBG) lattice [221], and (c) Prototype of an M-shaped printed monopole antenna and slotted Jerusalem Cross (JC)-artificial magnetic conductor (AMC) [208].
Figure 13Implantable antennas. (a) Implantable slot antenna, (b) embedded in PDMS [222], (c) Geometry of low specific absorption rate (SAR) antenna and its prototype [223], and (d) geometry of flexible implantable loop antenna with complementary split ring resonator (CSRR) [224].
Figure 14Antenna for ingestible application. (a) Fabricated capsule antenna and (b) measurement setup using Agilent e5063A vector network analyzer [226].
Figure 15Prototypes of antenna for biomedical applications. (a) Proposed antenna, (b) integrated capsule system, and (c) measurement setup of communication system [227].
Figure 16Antenna for wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) application. (a) Antenna Assembly and (b) measurement set up for fabricated antenna [228].
Figure 17Experiment process of compressive and tensile bending and stretching the antenna along the x-axis and y-axis [23].
Figure 18Impact of bending on antenna performance. (a) 3-D bending setup and definition of the bending angle in CST microwave studio, and (b) simulated |S11| for different bending angles [42].
Figure 19Comparative return loss of planar vs. conformal antenna configuration along the cylindrical surface of radii, r1 = 6 mm, r2 = 8 mm, and r3 = 10 mm [82].
Figure 20Measured of the proposed antenna placed on human tissue. (a) Measurement setup and (b) curves [233].
Figure 21Antenna bending simulation. (a) Bending setup. (b) S-bending setup. (c) Return loss characteristics [235].
Flexible antenna performance comparison of recent investigations.
| Reference No: | Antenna Type: | Dimensions mm3 | Substrate, | Bandwidth | Resonant Frequency | Bandwidth and Resonant Frequency under Bending | Antenna Gain and Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal Condition | Under Bending | |||||||
| [ | Microstrip Patch | 65 × 46 × 0.127, | Kapton Polyimide, Flexible Copper Tape | 900 MHZ | Increased 3.1% and 1.3% (along x-axis and y-axis) for compressive bending and decreased 4.2% and 0.3% (along x-axis and y-axis) for tensile bending | N/A | N/A | |
| [ | Microstrip-based Koch fractal | 39 × 39 × 0.508, WBAN applications | Vinyl polymer based flexible substrate, Cu | 2.36–2.55 GHz | 2.45 GHz. | A slight shift in resonant frequency, bandwidth remained almost identical. | 2.06 dBi. 75% | −0.57 dBi (on-body) |
| [ | Microstrip patch. | 60 × 60 × 0.110, C-band and future organic electronics applications | Rogers RT/Duroid ® 5870, PANI/MWCNTs | 4.43–4.76 GHz (7.33% width) | 4.5 GHz. | N/A | 5.18 dB | N/A |
| [ | Elliptical quasi-dipole antenna | 46 × 45 | Kapton Polyimide, graphene flakes. | 1–5 GHz | 2 GHz. | 32,500 bending cycles decrease the resistance of the graphene flakes—no mention of performance analysis of the antenna. | 2.3 dBi at 4.8 GHz, 56 ± 5%. | N/A |
| [ | Multilayer microstrip fractal patch antenna | 22 × 31 × 0.125, On-package, and on-chip printed antennas. | Kapton Polyimide, Ag NP | 4.79–5.04 GHz. | N/A | Bandwidth for different bending radius was a bit wider. | Peak gain 4.5 dBi | Gain increase of 0.3 and 0.4 dB at 4.9 GHz for bending. |
| [ | CPW-fed Bowtie Slot antenna | 64 × 42 × 0.135, WLAN, WiMax, 3G, and 4G application. | PET, Ag NP | 2.1 GHz to 4.35 GHz (69.77%) | 2.1, 3.3, and 4.1 GHz | Bandwidth shifted to the lower frequency region | 6.3 dBi at 4.35 GHz | N/A |
| [ | CPW-fed Slotted Disc monopole | 40 × 38 × 0.135, ISM band, suitable for early detection of brain stroke | PET, Ag NP | 2.25–2.73 GHz (19.55%) | 2.45 GHz | Return loss decreased −5 dB at 2.45 GHz. The resonant frequency did not shift for different bending radius. | 2.78 dBi at 2.45 GHz. | 2.51 dBi at 2.45 GHz |
| [ | Microstrip patch antenna | 40 × 35 × 0.6, Intrabody telemedicine systems in the 2.4 GHz ISM bands | Photo Paper, Cu strips | 2.33–2.53 GHz (8.33%) | 2.43 GHz. | Reflection coefficient remained adequately consistent with various bending radii, and a slight change in frequency occurred | 2 dBi, 83% efficiency | More than 2 dBi, 70% efficiency on human phantom |
| [ | CPW-fed rectangular patch with tapered sides and slots | 11 × 12 × 0.1, Future flexible 5G front ends and mm-wave wearable devices. | Rogers ULTRALAM 3850 LCP substrate, Ag NP. | 26–40 GHz | 28 GHz, 38 GHz. | Bandwidth and resonance frequency remains conserved even if the prototypes are folded or bent for conformal integrations. | Peak gain 11.35 dBi at 35 GHz and above 9dBi for entire Ka-band | N/A |
| [ | Dipole RFID tag antenna | Radius 15 mm, height 7.5 mm, RFID applications for wearable devices in FCC band. | Button shaped ABS substrate, Ag NP | 910–925 MHz | 920 MHz | N/A | Peak gain of −5.6 dB and maximum reading range of 2.1 m with a total transmitted power of 4.0 W | N/A |
| [ | Monopole antenna etched with three elliptic single complementary split-ring resonators. | 27 × 21 × 0.068, Ultra-wideband band-notched antenna. | LCP substrate, laminated Cu | 3.7–4.2 GHz, 5.15–5.35 GHz, and 5.725–5.825 GHz | N/A | The center-frequencies shift a little to a higher frequency for all the notched bands | 2.41 and −0.44 dBi at 4.6 and 6.2 GHz | N/A |
| [ | Slotted Monopole Patch | 24 × 28 × 1.524 | PDMS composite, conductive fabric | 3.43–11.1 GHz (59.9%) | N/A | Bandwidth varied a maximum of 1% variation | 2–4 dBi | N/A |
| [ | CPW-fed H-shaped slot antenna | 32 × 52 × 0.28, UWB antenna for wearable applications. | Flexible ceramic substrate ( | 4.1–8.0 GHz (67%) | 4.45, 5.6, and 7.1 GHz | Both the lower bandwidth and the upper bandwidth broaden as the antenna bends, whereas the radiation efficiency is not noticeably affected. Resonant frequency heavily shifted for on-body applications. | 3.9 dBi at 7.45 GHz | 4.1 dBi at 7.45 GHz |
| [ | CPW-fed rectangular slot with chamfer | 11.8 × 12.2 × 0.1, Mobile terminal for Fifth Generation (5G) | Kapton polyimide, Graphene ink | 14.30–15.71 GHz (9.40%) | 13.8 GHz | N/A | 9..28dBi, 67.44% | N/A |
| [ | Multi-slot antenna with full ground plane. | 85 × 60 × 4.1, Wearable EM head imaging system. | PDMS- | 1–4.3 GHz (124%) | 1.13 GHz, 3 GHz. | Bending changed resonant frequencies but bandwidth remained almost identical | N/A | N/A |
| [ | Circular ring slot antenna with EBG structure | 81 × 81 × 4, wearable applications in ISM band | Wool felt, conductive textile “Nora-Dell-CR Fabric.” | 2.28–2.64 GHz | 2.45 GHz | 7.3 dBi peak gain in the ISM band, 70% efficiency when EBG added. | N/A | |
| [ | CPW-fed Hybrid Shaped patch | 30.4 × 38 × 70, WWAN terminals, WBAN devices, and medical sensors. | Kapton polyimide, Copper | 3.06–13.58 GHz, 15.9–20.5 GHz, and 20.9–22 GHz | 3.5, 6.7, and 12 GHz | Bandwidth for 20 mm curvature is 2.8 to 13.55 and 16.6 to 22 GHz and 10 mm is 3.1 to 12.8 and 16.7 to 22 GHz | Higher than 1.69 dBi in 3–18 GHz range, 59% efficiency | Not much difference |
| [ | CPW-fed circular monopole | 34 × 25 × 0.135, ISM bands, ultra-wideband, WLAN band, WiMAX band, and 5G | PET, Ag NP | 1.66–56.1 GHz (188.5%) | N/A | Bending side by side (yz plane) shifts the resonance point in the lower band, and the lower frequency of the bandwidth at a more moderate Bending in the top to bottom (xz plane) almost follows the same trend | More than 3 dB from 2.1- 56.1 GHz. Efficiency 85% to 99% from higher and lower frequency | N/A |
| [ | Rectangular slotted metamaterial resonator patch antenna | 60 × 60 × 2, IEEE 802.11 a and b/g/n WLAN, WiMAX, and GSM band | Low cost jeans, N/A | 1.6–2.56 GHz (46%) and 4.24–7 GHz (49.11%) | 2.45 GHz, 5.8 GHz. | Bandwidth and radiation patterns were affected due to bending. Below 30 mm bending radius, performance deteriorated much more. | 1.6 dB in the lower band and 5 dB in the upper band. | N/A |
| [ | Z-shaped microstrip patch antenna | 45 × 36 × 0.135, dual-band Wi-Fi and wearable devices | PET, Ag NP | N/A, | 900 MHz, 2.4 GHz. | The resonant frequency shifted from 0.9 GHz to 0.75 GHz and from 2.4 GHz to 2.2 GHz, and | 16.74 and 16.24 dBi at 900 MHz and 2.4 GHz | |
Figure 22(a) Hybrid solar and electromagnetic energy (EM) energy harvesting antenna on PET substrate [263] and (b) reconfigurable antenna with AMC surface [271].