Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:08:38.831Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A review on microstrip patch antenna parameters of different geometry and bandwidth enhancement techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2021

Brijesh Mishra*
Affiliation:
Madan Mohan Malaviya University of Technology, Gorakhpur, UP, 273010, India
Ramesh Kumar Verma
Affiliation:
Bundelkhand Institute of Engineering & Technology, Jhansi, UP, India
Yashwanth N
Affiliation:
Nagarjuna College of Engineering & Technology, Bangalore, India
Rakesh Kumar Singh
Affiliation:
Shambhunath Institute of Engineering and Technology, Prayagraj, UP, India
*
Author for correspondence: Brijesh Mishra, E-mail: brijesh.mishra0933@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive review of symmetrically shaped antennas in terms of antenna size, dielectric materials, resonating band, peak gain, radiation pattern, simulating tools, and their applications. In this article, flower shape, leaf shape, tree shape, fan shape, Pi shape, butterfly shape, bat shape, wearable, multiband, monopole, and fractal antennas are discussed. Further, a survey of previously reported bandwidth enhancement techniques of microstrip patch antenna like introduction of thick and lower permittivity substrate, multilayer substrate, parasitic elements, slots and notches, shorting wall, shorting pin, defected ground structure, metamaterial-based split ring resonator structure, fractal geometry, and composite right-hand/left-handed transmission line approach is presented. The physics of these techniques has been discussed in detail which is supported by circuit theory model approach.

Information

Type
Antenna Design, Modeling and Measurements
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press in association with the European Microwave Association
Figure 0

Fig. 1. (a) Flower shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of flower shape fabricated antenna; reprint with permission from [5].

Figure 1

Table 1. Comparative analysis of flower shape antennas

Figure 2

Fig. 2. (a) Leaf shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of leaf shape antenna; reprint with permission from [15].

Figure 3

Table 2. Comparative analysis of leaf shape antennas

Figure 4

Fig. 3. (a) Tree shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of tree shape antenna; reprint with permission from [22].

Figure 5

Table 3. Comparative analysis of tree shape antennas

Figure 6

Fig. 4. (a) Fan shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of Fan shape antenna; reprint with permission from [29].

Figure 7

Table 4. Comparative analysis of fan shape antennas

Figure 8

Fig. 5. (a) Pi shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of Pi shape antenna.

Figure 9

Table 5. Comparative analysis of Pi shape antennas

Figure 10

Table 6. Comparative analysis of butterfly shape antennas

Figure 11

Fig. 6. (a) Butterfly shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of butterfly shape antenna; reprint with permission from [36].

Figure 12

Fig. 7. (a) Bat shape antenna geometry. (b) Fabricated photograph of bat shape antenna; reprint with permission from [41].

Figure 13

Table 7. Comparative analysis of bat shape antennas

Figure 14

Table 8. Comparative analysis of wearable antennas

Figure 15

Table 9. Comparative analysis of multiband antennas

Figure 16

Table 10. Comparative analysis of monopole antennas

Figure 17

Table 11. Comparative overview of bandwidth enhancement techniques of MSAs

Figure 18

Fig. 8. Equivalent circuit of notch loaded patch antenna.