Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T04:38:48.534Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A novel compact quad-band planar antenna using meander-line, multi-stubs, and slots for WiMAX, WLAN, LTE/5G sub-6 GHz applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 August 2022

Tarek Maamria*
Affiliation:
Antennas and Microwave Devices Laboratory, Polytechnic Military School, Bordj El Bahri, 16111 Algiers, Algeria
Mouloud Challal
Affiliation:
Signals and Systems Laboratory, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University M'hamed BOUGARA of Boumerdes, Boumerdes, Algeria
Fateh Benmahmoud
Affiliation:
Antennas and Microwave Devices Laboratory, Polytechnic Military School, Bordj El Bahri, 16111 Algiers, Algeria
Khelil Fertas
Affiliation:
Signals and Systems Laboratory, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University M'hamed BOUGARA of Boumerdes, Boumerdes, Algeria
Ammar Mesloub
Affiliation:
Antennas and Microwave Devices Laboratory, Polytechnic Military School, Bordj El Bahri, 16111 Algiers, Algeria
*
Author for correspondence: Tarek Maamria, E-mail: maamria.tarek@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article concerns the design of a new quad-band monopole antenna with a specific configuration and reduced size. The antenna design is based on a single step meander-line parasitic structure, parasitic stubs, and double inverted L-shaped defected microstrip structure units on the top side of the substrate, and double rectangular-shaped defected ground structure units along with partial ground plane on the bottom side. This design procedure allows to achieve quad-band characteristics and improve the impedance matching. The fabricated antenna prototype with overall dimensions of (0.24λ0 × 0.17λ0 × 0.013λ0) is operating at 2.55, 3.65, 4.65, and 5.8 GHz with fractional bandwidth about 7.7, 12.84, 9.23, and 12.8%, respectively. The antenna exhibits an omnidirectional and a monopole like radiation patterns in the H- and E-planes, respectively, with suitable gains between 2.1 and 3.75 dBi. The measurement results are in good agreement with simulation values, which indicates that the proposed antenna design is suitable for WiMAX, LTE B7 (2.52–2.75 GHz), Sub-6 GHz 5G (n77) (3.39 – 3.87 GHz), Sub-6 GHz 5G (n78) (4.4–4.86 GHz), and WLAN, LTE B46 (5.1–5.82 GHz) wireless applications.

Information

Type
Antenna Design, Modeling and Measurements
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the European Microwave Association
Figure 0

Table 1. Required frequency bands for the proposed antenna [18]

Figure 1

Fig. 1. Geometry of the proposed antenna: (a) front view; (b) back view, and (c) patch view.

Figure 2

Table 2. Geometrical dimensions of the proposed antenna

Figure 3

Fig. 2. Evolution procedure of the proposed antenna geometry.

Figure 4

Fig. 3. Reflection coefficient magnitude versus frequency for different antenna structures.

Figure 5

Fig. 4. Surface current distribution on the radiating patch and modified ground plane of the proposed antenna at 2.55, 3.65, 4.65, and 5.8 GHz resonant frequencies.

Figure 6

Fig. 5. Variations of the real and imaginary parts of the antenna input impedance Z11.

Figure 7

Fig. 6. Effect of varying the square-ring width a.

Figure 8

Fig. 7. Effect of varying the meander-line length L1 + L2.

Figure 9

Fig. 8. Effect of varying the L-shaped slot length.

Figure 10

Fig. 9. Effect of varying the length of the open stubs.

Figure 11

Fig. 10. Fabricated antenna and measurement setup. (a) Photograph of the proposed antenna, and (b) antenna measurement in an anechoic chamber.

Figure 12

Fig. 11. Simulated and measured reflection coefficient magnitude of the proposed antenna.

Figure 13

Fig. 12. Antenna's performance in terms of (a) realized gain, and (b) radiation efficiency.

Figure 14

Fig. 13. Simulated and measured radiation patterns of E- and H-planes at 2.55, 3.65, 4.65, and 5.8 GHz (xp, cross-polarization; cp, co-polarization).

Figure 15

Table 3. Performance comparison with recently published works