How do I make more smaller sidelobelevel value of patch antenna?

  • Thread starter Thread starter everjordan
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Antenna Value
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on optimizing a 6x1 series fed microstrip rectangular patch antenna designed using HFSS, aiming for a sidelobe level (SLL) of less than -25dB and a return loss (S11) of less than -20dB. Initial designs yielded an SLL around -20dB, prompting adjustments to the patch width and connection line length, with calculations performed using MATLAB to refine these parameters. Despite modifications, the SLL remained between -10 to -15dB, leading to further changes in the patch width and connection line length, resulting in an SLL of approximately -20dB. The user seeks additional advice or references to achieve a lower SLL, indicating a need for advanced techniques or methodologies.
everjordan
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi :)

I am designing 6x1 series fed microstrip rectangular patch antenna by using HFSS.
The schematic of the my design is below.
attachment.php?attachmentid=35967&stc=1&d=1306489779.jpg


This figure is the half of my design for the past analysis.


My goal is below.

SLL(side lobe level <-25dB)
S11(<-20dB)

After I design the patch antenna, I found SLL around -20dB.
However, I want to reduce this value.

So, I check the internet & some papers and found some important parameters.
1. both width and length of patch antenna
2. length of the connection line
{
connection line is the microstrip line.
connection line exits between patch and another patch.
connection line has high impedance[100ohms].
I set the length of line L-2delta(L) {L is the length of the patch antenna}
}

And below is the parameters for antenna.
resonance freq = 26GHz
permitivity = 2.2
height of the substrate = 0.79mm
The values of effective permitivity, both length and width of the patch antenna
are below.

222.jpg


I found that the calculated values are not perfect value.
So I have changed the value such as width of the patch antenna, length of the connection line.

If the width of patch antenna is changed, length of the patch antenna also will be changed.
So, I use MATLAB tool then change the length of the patch antenna and effective permitivity.

These are MATLAB code.

{
% method to obtain patch's length
clc;
clear all;
h = 0.79;
w = 4.53;
er = 2.2;
ee = ((er+1)./2 ) + ((er-1)./2).*(1+12.*h./w)^(-0.5);
f = 26.*(10^(9));
c = 3.*10.^(8);

deltal = h.*0.412.*(ee+0.3).*((w./h) + 0.264)./(ee-0.258)./((w./h) + 0.8) ;
l = 0.5.*3.*(10.^(8))./f./sqrt(ee) - 2.*deltal./1000;
l = l*1000;

w

deltal
l
deltal+l

}

First I set these values to my desin.
However, value of SLL is only around -10~-15dB.
So, I changed width of patch antenna to lambda/2.
And I changed length of the connection line to L-delta(L).
As a result, value of SLL is around -20dB.
333.jpg

To reduce the value of SLL, I change the length of the connection line to -0.01mm incremental.
However, the variation is a little.

How do I make smaller value of SLL?

If u give some advices or some references, it will be helpful.
Thank you~!
 

Attachments

  • 111.jpg
    111.jpg
    15.2 KB · Views: 506
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
From what I remember in my antenna class, we've symbolically derived the pattern for array factor(I think), for specific size of an antenna array. Then, depending on the value of sidelobe value desired, appropriate filter coefficients were calculated to achieve the desired sidelobe values. These were equated to the terms in the radiation pattern. I used Chebyshev polynomials in the example below.

%part c
N=10;
theta_a=-90:.1:90;
betaa=0;
betab=-90;
psia=180*sind(theta_a)+betaa;
psib=180*sind(theta_a)+betab;
Af1=2/N*(cosd((2*1-1)*psia/2)+cosd((2*2-1)*psia/2)+cosd((2*3-1)*psia/2)+cosd((2*4-1)*psia/2)+cosd((2*5-1)*psia/2));
Af2=2/N*(cosd((2*1-1)*psib/2)+cosd((2*2-1)*psib/2)+cosd((2*3-1)*psib/2)+cosd((2*4-1)*psib/2)+cosd((2*5-1)*psib/2));
figure(1);
subplot(2,1,1),plot(theta_a, 20*log10(abs(Af1))), axis([-90 90 -50 0]), xlabel('theta'), ylabel('|AFn|dB'), title('Pr.3c Normalized AF vs. theta, theta0=0 deg'), grid on;
subplot(2,1,2),plot(theta_a, 20*log10(abs(Af2))), axis([-90 90 -50 0]), xlabel('theta'), ylabel('|AFn|dB'), title('Pr.3c Normalized AF vs. theta, theta0=30 deg'), grid on;%part d-e
SLL=-30;
R=10^(-SLL/20);
u0=cosh(1/(N-1)*acosh(R));
psi=10:10:50;
%[A]=*
B=zeros(5,5);
A=zeros(1,5);
%Td is the Chebyshev polynomial
for c=1:1:5;
u=u0*cosd(psi(c)/2);
A(c)=cosh((N-1)*acosh(u)); %Td(u)
for i=1:1:5;
B(c,i)=2*cosd((2*i-1)/2*psi(c));
end
end

A=A';
IB=inv(B);
I=IB*A;

Af3=2/(N*I(3))*(I(1)*cosd((2*1-1)*psia/2)+I(2)*cosd((2*2-1)*psia/2)+I(3)*cosd((2*3-1)*psia/2)+I(4)*cosd((2*4-1)*psia/2)+I(5)*cosd((2*5-1)*psia/2));
Af4=2/(N*I(3))*(I(1)*cosd((2*1-1)*psib/2)+I(2)*cosd((2*2-1)*psib/2)+I(3)*cosd((2*3-1)*psib/2)+I(4)*cosd((2*4-1)*psib/2)+I(5)*cosd((2*5-1)*psib/2));
figure(2);
subplot(2,1,1),plot(theta_a, 20*log10(abs(Af3))), axis([-90 90 -50 0]), xlabel('theta'), ylabel('|AFn|dB'), title('Pr.3e Normalized AF vs. theta, theta0=0 deg'), grid on;
subplot(2,1,2),plot(theta_a, 20*log10(abs(Af4))), axis([-90 90 -50 0]), xlabel('theta'), ylabel('|AFn|dB'), title('Pr.3e Normalized AF vs. theta, theta0=30 deg'), grid on;
 
Hi all I have some confusion about piezoelectrical sensors combination. If i have three acoustic piezoelectrical sensors (with same receive sensitivity in dB ref V/1uPa) placed at specific distance, these sensors receive acoustic signal from a sound source placed at far field distance (Plane Wave) and from broadside. I receive output of these sensors through individual preamplifiers, add them through hardware like summer circuit adder or in software after digitization and in this way got an...
I have recently moved into a new (rather ancient) house and had a few trips of my Residual Current breaker. I dug out my old Socket tester which tell me the three pins are correct. But then the Red warning light tells me my socket(s) fail the loop test. I never had this before but my last house had an overhead supply with no Earth from the company. The tester said "get this checked" and the man said the (high but not ridiculous) earth resistance was acceptable. I stuck a new copper earth...
Thread 'Beauty of old electrical and measuring things, etc.'
Even as a kid, I saw beauty in old devices. That made me want to understand how they worked. I had lots of old things that I keep and now reviving. Old things need to work to see the beauty. Here's what I've done so far. Two views of the gadgets shelves and my small work space: Here's a close up look at the meters, gauges and other measuring things: This is what I think of as surface-mount electrical components and wiring. The components are very old and shows how...
Back
Top