Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T05:07:54.645Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Low-profile, wideband dual-polarized 1 × 2 MIMO antenna with FSS decoupling technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2021

B. Anudeep*
Affiliation:
Electronics and Communication Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India
K. Krishnamoorthy
Affiliation:
Electronics and Communication Engineering Department, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India
P. H. Rao
Affiliation:
Microwave Communication and Antenna Division, SAMEER-Centre for Electromagnetics, Chennai, India
*
Author for correspondence: B. Anudeep, E-mail: deepubellary30@gmail.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A low-profile, wideband dual-polarized 1 × 2 multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) antenna with frequency selective surface (FSS) decoupling technique is presented. Low profile is realized with two different artificial magnetic conductor (AMC) cells out of which one operates at 3.5 GHz and other with dual band at 3.1 and 4.5 GHz. The proposed antenna height is maintained at 0.125λ0 which is significantly reduced when compared with the conventional perfect electric conductor (PEC) ground plane. Wideband dual polarization is enabled by two pairs of bow-tie antenna elements surrounded by a square ring placed in the orthogonal orientation. To mitigate the near-field coupling in 1 × 2 MIMO an FSS wall is constructed with wide band stop characteristics from 2.85 to 4.75 GHz. Measured results show by inserting FSS wall vertically, coupling reduction is improved by 27 dB over the existing coupling and the antenna exhibits a bandwidth of 57.14% (2.95–4.95 GHz) for VSWR<2 with port isolation of more than 25 dB for entire band of operation.

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) Geometry of the proposed low-profile DPA configuration. (b) Side view of low-profile DPA.

Figure 1

Table 1. Optimized dimensions of the proposed 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna

Figure 2

Fig. 2. (a) Simulated and measured S-parameters of DPA. (b) Measured gain plot of DPA.

Figure 3

Fig. 3. (a) Geometry of the proposed AMC unit cell at 3.5 GHz. (b) Geometry of the proposed dual-band AMC unit cell at 3.1 and 4.5 GHz.

Figure 4

Fig. 4. Simulated reflection phase diagram of plane wave with polarization angle ϕ = 45° for different incident angles θ: (a) AMC cell 1 and (b) AMC cell 2.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. (a) Geometry of the proposed wide bandstop FSS unit cell. (b) Simulated S-parameters of wide bandstop FSS unit cell.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. (a) Low-profile 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna configuration with FSS wall. (b) Fabricated prototype of FSS wall.

Figure 7

Fig. 7. (a) Top view and (b) isometric view of the fabricated low-profile 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna with FSS wall.

Figure 8

Fig. 8. Surface current distribution of the 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna when port E1-1 is activated at (i) 3.1 GHz, (ii) 3.5 GHz, and (iii) 4.5 GHz for (a) without FSS wall and (b) with FSS wall.

Figure 9

Fig. 9. Measured (a) port to port isolation and (b) mutual coupling reduction with and without FSS wall in 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna.

Figure 10

Fig. 10. Measured and simulated results: (a) reflection coefficient and (b) port to port isolation in 1  ×  2 MIMO antenna.

Figure 11

Fig. 11. Simulated and measured normalized radiation patterns when port E1-1 is excited for MIMO antenna element: (a) E-plane and (b) H-plane.

Figure 12

Fig. 12. Measurement setup of MIMO antenna element.

Figure 13

Table 2. Performance of proposed MIMO antenna element with and without chessboard AMC surface

Figure 14

Table 3. Performance comparison of the proposed MIMO antenna element with previous antenna designs

Figure 15

Fig. 13. Measured (a) ECC and (b) TARC of the proposed 1 × 2 MIMO antenna with and without FSS.

Figure 16

Table 4. Simulated ECC and DG using far-field patterns

Figure 17

Table 5. Performance comparison of the 1 × 2 MIMO antenna with referenced antennas