Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-6grmk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T03:51:36.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Breast tissue tumor detection using “S” parameter analysis with an UWB stacked aperture coupled microstrip patch antenna having a “ + ” shaped defected ground structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 November 2019

Gagandeep Kaur
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala147004, India
Amanpreet Kaur*
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala147004, India
*
Author for correspondence: Amanpreet Kaur, E-mail: amanpreet.kaur@thapar.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Microwave imaging is an efficient technique that can be used for the early detection of breast cancer. Therefore the current research article presents the microwave imaging of two spherical tumors (radius 4 and 5 mm) in the breast phantom by using the monostatic radar-based technique. This is carried out by using an ultra-wideband (4.9–10.9 GHz), three-layered stacked aperture coupled microstrip antenna (SACMPA) with a defected ground structure to scan the breast phantom and make near field S parameter measurements from a breast phantom. The S parameter data from different locations and at different time intervals are noted and then used in a beam-forming algorithm; Delay and Sum to process it and form a 2D image of the tumor location in the breast phantom using MATLAB.

The proposed SACMPA is a three-layered structure with overall dimensions of 37 × 43 × 4.85 mm3 that shows an impedance bandwidth of 6 GHz (4.9–10.9 GHz) and a simulated peak gain of 6.32 dB at a frequency of 9.1 GHz. The validation of S parameters and gain results are done using a Vector Network Analyzer (VNA) and an anechoic chamber. The experimental validation of the proposed microwave imaging procedure is done by allowing the SACMPA to radiate parallel to the breast phantom made from polythene (skin), petroleum jelly (fat), and wheat flour (with water as tumor) and record the S parameters on the VNA. The proposed microwave method is safe for human exposure as the antenna also shows simulated specific absorption rates of 0.271 and 1.115 W/Kg (on the breast phantom) at frequencies of 5.7 and 6.5 GHz, respectively (for 1 g of body tissue).

Information

Type
Biomedical Applications
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2019
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Parasitic patch with U-shaped slot, (b) Swastika shaped active patch, (c) “ + ” shaped DGS in ground plane, (d) Feed line with rectangular shaped tuning stub.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Perspective view of antenna layers.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. (a) Parametric variation of aperture (slot) in ground plane with a conventional SACMPA. (b) S parameter response for different slotted geometries of active and parasitic patches. (c) Return loss for antenna with stub and without stub attached to feed line.

Figure 3

Table 1. Optimized parametric values of SACMPA parts

Figure 4

Fig. 4. Fabricated antenna layers: (a) upper parasitic patch layer, (b) lower active patch layer, (c) defected ground plane with plus-shaped DGS, (d) feed-line attached with stub.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. (a) Assembled SACMPA (b) Antenna testing in anechoic chamber.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. (a) Comparison plot between simulated and measured “S” parameters of antenna with respect to frequency. (b) Proposed SACMPA testing on VNA.

Figure 7

Fig. 7. (a) Broadband gain; (b) 3D Radiation pattern at 9.1 GHz (c) E plane at 9.1 GHz, (d) H plane at 9.1 GHz (e) E plane at 7.8 GHz (f) H plane at 7.8 GHz of the SACMPA.

Figure 8

Table 2. Electrical properties of the layered breast phantom

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Spherical breast phantom model (a) Skin layer of 4 mm, (b) Fatty layer of 32 mm inside skin, (c) Tumor of 8 mm diameter inside fat (d) Phantom placed parallel to the broadside radiating antenna structure.

Figure 10

Fig. 9. (a) Comparison of simulated return loss parameters in the presence and absence of tumor of 4 mm placed at center. (b) Comparison of simulated return loss parameters in the presence and absence of tumor (radius of 5 mm) placed at off-center (−4, 0).

Figure 11

Table 3. Variation in the antenna return loss parameters in the presence and absence of tumor in the breast (with respect to Fig. 9(a))

Figure 12

Fig.10. SAR values on the breast phantom at (a) 5.7 GHz and (b) 6.5 GHz.

Figure 13

Fig. 11. (a) Breast phantom (b) Tumor made of wheat flour at center of breast phantom.

Figure 14

Table 4. Electrical properties of breast phantom

Figure 15

Fig. 12. Measured S parameters of the proposed antenna in the presence of breast phantom.

Figure 16

Fig. 13. Comparison of measured S parameters of the proposed antenna with and without the tumor affected breast phantom.

Figure 17

Fig. 14. Time-domain pulses after coherent sum of S parameter.

Figure 18

Fig. 15. (a) 5 mm (radius) tumor placed at (−4, 0) inside breast phantom at center. (b) 4 mm (radius) tumor placed at center (0, 0) inside breast phantom.

Figure 19

Fig. 16. Spherical breast phantom placed in between array of SACMPAs.

Figure 20

Table 5. Comparison of proposed breast cancer detection technique with the existing ones

Figure 21

Fig. 17. Combined plot of S parameters for an array of three antennas.

Figure 22

Fig. 18. S11, S22, and S33 plots of the three antennas against frequency.