Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T09:11:19.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Design of a wearable MIMO antenna deployed with an inverted U-shaped ground stub for diversity performance enhancement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2020

Anupma Gupta*
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala, Punjab, India
Ankush Kansal
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Thapar Institute of Engineering and Technology, Patiala, Punjab, India
Paras Chawla
Affiliation:
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, University Institute of Engineering, Chandigarh University, Chandigarh, India
*
Author for correspondence: Anupma Gupta, E-mail: anupmagupta31@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A compact multiple input multiple output (MIMO) antenna operating at 2.45 GHz industrial scientific and medical band is presented for wearable devices. Open-end slotting is used to miniaturize the antenna dimensions. Inverted U-shaped ground stub is incorporated to reduce mutual coupling. On-body performance is analyzed on a three-layered equivalent tissue phantom model. The wide bandwidth of 300 MHz and port isolation of 30 dB are obtained from measured results. The antenna shows the efficiency of 40% and directivity of 4.56 dBi when placed at a gap of “s” = 4 mm from the body. Broadside radiation pattern and low specific absorption rate make the antenna suitable for on-body communication. Further, diversity performance is measured in terms of envelope correlation coefficient (ECC), diversity gain (DG), and channel capacity loss (CCL). The value of ECC is 0.025, DG is 9.98 dB, and CCL is 0.12 bits/s/Hz at 2.45 GHz. Antenna robustness is examined by bending the structure at different radii along the x-axis and y-axis. Performance of the proposed structure is reliable with structural deformation.

Information

Type
Antenna Design, Modelling and Measurements
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2020
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Structure of single-element antenna with simulation setup and surface current distribution: (a) top view, (b) bottom view, (c) simulation setup, (d) surface current.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Stepwise structure of single-element antenna: (a) step 1 front view, (b) step 2 front view, (c) step 3 and step 4 front view, (d) back view for step 1–step 3, and (e) step 4 back view.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Reflection coefficient of single-element antenna design steps.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Effect of varying slot lengths on reflection coefficient in step 1: (a) varying CW1 and (b) varying CW4.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Plot for input impedance: (a) real part and (b) imaginary part.

Figure 5

Table 1. Geometrical parameters of the proposed structure

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Structure of MIMO antenna: (a) front view and (b) back view.

Figure 7

Fig. 7. S-parameters of MIMO antenna with and without stub.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Surface current distribution of MIMO antenna (a) without stub, (b) with stub front view, and (c) back view.

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Effect of varying “s” on antenna performance: (a) reflection coefficient, (b) gain, and (c) radiation efficiency.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Photographs of the experimental setup: (a) antenna placed on pork loin, (b) return loss plot on VNA, and (c) antenna in an anechoic chamber.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. Measured and simulated reflection coefficient.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. (a) E-plane radiation pattern, (b) H-plane radiation pattern, (c) simulated 3D radiation pattern at 2.45 GHz, and (d) plot for simulated and measured gain over the frequency.

Figure 13

Fig. 13. SAR value of the proposed MIMO antenna.

Figure 14

Fig. 14. S-parameters for bending along the x-axis.

Figure 15

Fig. 15. S-parameters for bending along the y-axis.

Figure 16

Fig. 16. 3D radiation plot for deformation cases: (a) along the x-axis and (b) along the y-axis.

Figure 17

Fig. 17. ECC and DG of the proposed antenna.

Figure 18

Fig. 18. Plot for channel capacity loss (CCL).

Figure 19

Table 2. Comparison of the proposed antenna with the existing on-body antennas