Simulation Comparisons of Three Different Meander Line Dipoles
Author(s) -
Seth A. McCormick
Publication year - 2015
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Reports
DOI - 10.21236/ada617035
Subject(s) - meander (mathematics) , reflection coefficient , bandwidth (computing) , antipodal point , planar , optics , dipole , reflection (computer programming) , square (algebra) , physics , geometry , mathematics , telecommunications , engineering , computer science , quantum mechanics , computer graphics (images) , programming language
: This report presents simulation comparisons between an antipodal planar dipole (resonant at 450 MHz) and 3 different meander structures: square, sinusoidal, and triangular. The 3 different structures demonstrate the effect that different meander trace structures can have on size reduction, gain, reflection coefficient, and bandwidth. The meanders were designed first with a circuit equivalent. The results between the 3 structures show that for size reduction the square meander is the preferred method at 27.5% but it reduces the bandwidth by 22.37% with a loss in matching of 4.36 dB and gain loss of 0.26 dBi. The sinusoidal meander shows a size reduction of 23.04% and a bandwidth reduction of 12.9% with a loss in reflection coefficient by 0.48 dB and a loss in gain by about 0.14 dBi. The triangular meander shows the best results for the gain and reflection coefficient, while only having a size reduction of 19.82%. The triangular meander reduces the bandwidth by 16.0% with an improvement in matching by 0.69 dB and a loss of gain by 0.09 dBi. Ultimately, the preferred meander structure depends upon the application.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom