Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Low-Cost Wideband Tilted Beam Antenna for Millimeter-wave Vehicle Applications

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A slot-fed monopole array on FR4 achieves a measured 76.5% impedance bandwidth (20–44.78 GHz), peak gain 6.1 dBi, and a stable beam tilted about 46°, suitable for millimeter-wave roadside-to-vehicle links.

desk verdict A useful wideband FR4 antenna with credible bandwidth and gain measurements, but the stable-tilt claim needs stronger measured evidence across the band. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08239 v1 pith:37Q7YCND submitted 2025-06-09 eess.SP

Jiawang Li This is my paper
classification eess.SP
keywords tiltedbeamantennamillimeter-wavevehiclecommunicationFR4substrateslotmonopolearraywidebandlow-cost
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that a single, compact antenna can deliver a broadband tilted beam for millimeter-wave vehicle links without expensive substrates or mechanical tilting. The design excites a slot and a four-element monopole array from one feed; their horizontal and vertical radiated fields superpose to form a beam tilted roughly 46° from broadside. Measurements on an FR4 prototype show a −10 dB impedance bandwidth of 76.5% (20–44.78 GHz) and a peak realized gain of 6.1 dBi. The point of the work is that, if true, one low-cost element covers essentially all 5G millimeter-wave vehicle bands while keeping the beam direction stable across them.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the slot–monopole complementary-source pair: a y-oriented half-wave slot acts as a magnetic current with a broadside pattern, and the 1×4 grounded-via monopole array acts as an electric current with a monopole-like pattern. Placing the monopoles near the slot's field maximum lets one feed excite both radiators, and the superposition of their orthogonal field components rotates the main beam. The design feeds the slot center with a short microstrip line to suppress even-order slot modes, while the four monopoles add resonances that merge into one broad band; the analytical pattern model demonstrates that the tilt angle is insensitive to the excitation amplitude ratio, which is the paper's argument for wideband stability.

What would settle it

Measure the E-plane realized gain patterns at fine frequency steps across 20–44.78 GHz on the fabricated prototype. If the beam peak deviates from about 46° by more than a few degrees at any in-band frequency, or if any in-band frequency shows a sidelobe within the main-beam 3 dB cone, the stable-wideband-tilt claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a slot antenna directly fed by a short microstrip line and electromagnetically coupled to a 1×4 monopole array produces a tilted beam whose direction is intrinsically stable over a very wide band. The slot supplies a horizontal electric field with a broadside-like pattern, and the monopoles supply vertical electric fields with monopole-like patterns; with both radiators sharing nearly the same phase center, the far-field sum is a tilted pattern. An analytical model using closed-form monopole and slot patterns shows that the tilt direction is nearly independent of the slot-to-monopole excitation amplitude ratio, which the paper takes as evidence of wideband stability. Measured results on the 10×5.4×1.5 mm³ FR4 prototype give a −10 dB impedance bandwidth of 76.5% (20–44.78 GHz) and a peak realized gain of 6.1 dBi, with cross-polarization at least 15 dB below co-polarization at the beam peak.

Load-bearing premise

The whole wideband-stability argument rests on the assumption that the infinite-ground analytical model's insensitivity to excitation amplitude ratio survives on the real finite-ground, lossy FR4 structure at all in-band frequencies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The single element can cover the main 5G millimeter-wave bands (n257, n258, n260, and n261) in one radiator, which the paper states as a motivation.
  • Because the radiating fields stay out of the lossy dielectric, FR4 becomes usable at millimeter waves, cutting material cost relative to low-loss laminates.
  • Roadside units can achieve the desired roughly 45° coverage without mechanically tilting the device, shrinking the installed cross-section.
  • The design can be extended to arrays: a simulated 1×4 rooftop subarray in the paper reaches 14.5 dBi at boresight and scans to about ±45° with roughly 4 dB gain reduction.
  • Bandwidth enhancement comes from merging resonances: adding monopoles raises the number of resonances and moves the input impedance toward 50 Ω over a wide range.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • I would extend the stability argument by sweeping finite-ground dimensions in simulation: the paper tests only four frequencies, so a continuous tilt-angle-versus-frequency curve on the real structure would verify what the infinite-ground model promises.
  • A natural design spin-off is tuning the tilt angle away from 46° by changing the slot-to-monopole coupling strength, if the model's amplitude-ratio insensitivity holds for amplitudes away from the 0.3 optimum.
  • The rooftop-array result is simulation-only; a fabricated 1×4 array would show whether rooftop multipath produces the main-lobe ripple the paper predicts.
  • The same slot-fed complementary-source layout might transfer to other lossy or flexible substrates, since the loss argument does not depend on FR4's specific permittivity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a compact, low-cost, wideband tilted-beam antenna for millimeter-wave vehicle-to-infrastructure applications. The design uses a slot antenna that is both directly excited by a short microstrip feed and electromagnetically coupled to a four-element monopole array; the horizontal electric field of the slot and the vertical currents of the monopoles superpose in the far field to form a tilted beam. The authors report a simulated -10-dB impedance bandwidth of 63.48% (22.41-43.25 GHz) and a measured bandwidth of 76.51% (20-44.78 GHz), with a measured peak realized gain of 6.1 dBi and a beam tilt of about 46 degrees. A simulated 1x4 array on a vehicle rooftop is also shown to provide beam scanning. The central claims are that the slot-monopole configuration is robust against FR4 losses, that multiple resonances are merged to provide wideband operation, and that the tilted beam is stable across the band.

Significance. If the wideband beam-stability claim is fully substantiated, this is a useful contribution: a single-port, low-profile, FR4-based antenna achieving roughly 76.5% impedance bandwidth, a peak gain above 6 dBi, and a beam tilt near 45 degrees would be attractive for roadside communication units. The paper's strengths include direct experimental validation of impedance bandwidth and gain, a clear step-by-step design evolution, and an explicit loss analysis for FR4 substrates. The analytical model is not fitted to the final measured patterns, so circularity is not a concern. However, the central claim of a stable wideband tilted beam currently rests on an infinite-ground analytical model and a small number of measured pattern cuts; the stress-test concern about finite-ground and frequency-dependent phase effects is legitimate and needs to be addressed before the claim is fully established.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II-C, Eq. (8)] The beam-stability argument is load-bearing but is built on an infinite-ground analytical model with a common phase center for the slot and monopole radiators. The stability test in Fig. 6 varies only the excitation amplitude ratio s1/s2 at a single frequency; it does not vary the relative phase between the two radiators, which can change with frequency in a coupled slot-monopole structure, nor does it include the finite ground or the higher-order slot mode identified at 41 GHz in Fig. 9(d). To substantiate the claim of a stable ~46-degree tilt over the full 76.5% band, the authors should provide full-wave simulated patterns of the final Ant IV across the band and a simulated and/or measured tilt-angle-versus-frequency curve, together with quantitative beam-pointing error or beamwidth data.
  2. [Section II-C and Table II] The text states that, due to the finite ground, 'the maximum gain direction will be about θ = 60°', but Table II reports a tilt angle of 46 degrees for this work and the abstract/conclusion imply about 46 degrees. This inconsistency is not resolved in the paper. If the infinite-ground model predicts 60 degrees and the realized antenna has 46 degrees, the model is not quantitatively predictive of the actual beam peak, and the subsequent inference of wideband stability from that model is weakened. The authors should define the tilt-angle convention used in both the model and the measurements and reconcile the 60-degree and 46-degree numbers.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 11] The experimental pattern support for the central wideband stability claim consists of E-plane and H-plane cuts at four frequencies: 26, 31, 36, and 41 GHz. There are no measured patterns at the band edges (20 GHz and 44.78 GHz), and no measured tilt angle or half-power beamwidth versus frequency is reported. Since the claim is that the beam is 'stable' across a 76.5% bandwidth, the authors should provide additional measured pattern cuts across the band, or at least a full-wave pattern sweep, and report a quantitative metric such as the direction of maximum gain as a function of frequency.
  4. [Section II-C, paragraph on higher-order slot mode] The sentence 'Similarly, the quasi-second-order mode of the slot and the monopole array also produce tilted beam patterns' is stated without derivation or full-wave support, even though Fig. 9(d) explicitly shows a higher-order slot mode at 41 GHz. Because this frequency lies inside the operating band and within the measured pattern set, the effect of the higher-order mode on the synthesized tilt and sidelobe level should be analyzed or at least verified with full-wave simulations of the final structure.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 11 caption] The word 'titled' in the caption should be 'tilted'.
  2. [Section I] There is a typo in 'h is he thickness'; it should read 'h is the thickness'.
  3. [Section II-B] The sentence 'based on some reference parameters [22]' is vague; it should specify which parameters are taken from which reference and how they relate to the loss analysis.
  4. [Section III, Fig. 12] The measured total efficiency is plotted but no numeric range or values are given in the text; a quantitative statement would help the reader assess the FR4 loss trade-off.
  5. [Section III, Fig. 13] The array simulation is described without specifying element spacing, array geometry, excitation amplitudes/phases, or whether the vehicle rooftop model is included; these details should be added if the array result is meant to support the application claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central wideband tilted-beam claim rests on full-wave simulation and direct measurement, not on the paper's analytical pattern model or self-cited prior work.

full rationale

The paper's central claims (76.5% bandwidth, 6.1 dBi gain, ~46-degree tilted beam) are established by full-wave simulation (HFSS) and by measured S11, radiation patterns, and realized gain. The analytical pattern synthesis in Sec. II-C is a design rationale, not a fit to the final result: it combines textbook slot and monopole patterns (Balanis; Awadalla-Maclean) through Eq. (8), and the amplitude ratio s1/s2 = 0.3 is chosen to reduce sidelobes, not inferred from the measured patterns. No predicted quantity is defined in terms of the measured outcome. The paper cites the author's own earlier work twice ([1] and [9]) in the introduction as background for 5G arrays and metamaterial beam tilting, but neither citation carries the load of the proposed antenna's claims, so these are non-load-bearing self-citations rather than circularity. The main evidentiary gap is that the infinite-ground model's extrapolation to a finite-ground 60-degree tilt is asserted rather than verified, and only four measured pattern cuts are provided; however, that is a correctness/completeness concern, not a reduction of the conclusion to its inputs. The analytical beam-stability argument is somewhat tautological because it assumes stable constituent patterns, but the final claim is independently checked by measurement. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central design depends on standard textbook antenna theory and manufacturer material data. No new physical entities are introduced. The main free choices are geometric dimensions and the excitation amplitude ratio, all obtained through simulation-based design, not through fitting the measured results.

free parameters (3)
  • Excitation amplitude ratio s1/s2 = 0.3
    In the analytical beam synthesis of Section II-C, Fig. 6, the ratio s1/s2 = 0.3 is selected to reduce sidelobes. It is a hand-chosen parameter in the illustrative model, not fitted to measured data.
  • Number of monopoles in the array = 4
    The number of monopoles is chosen to create additional resonances and improve matching, as shown in Fig. 8. It is a design choice, not derived from first principles.
  • Geometric dimensions and monopole spacing = Listed in Table I
    Physical dimensions such as slot length, monopole spacing, and feed line length are optimized via HFSS simulation. They are design parameters, not analytically derived, but are specified for reproduction.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Monopole on infinite ground plane pattern formulas (Balanis)
    Used in Eqs. (3)-(6) for the analytical beam synthesis, based on textbook formulas.
  • standard math Slot electric field distribution for the fundamental mode, Eq. (2)
    Standard cavity theory result from Balanis, used to justify monopole placement near the slot center.
  • domain assumption Far-field superposition of slot and monopole patterns with the same phase center, Eq. (8)
    Assumes slot and monopole array are co-located in the far field and that the phase center distance is negligible.
  • domain assumption FR4 substrate parameters (epsilon_r=4.4, tan delta=0.02) and TU768 prepreg (epsilon_r=4.3, tan delta=0.023)
    Material properties from manufacturer [19] are assumed accurate; the low-cost performance claim depends critically on these values.
  • domain assumption Huray surface roughness model parameters used in HFSS
    The loss analysis in Fig. 3(b) relies on the Huray model with assumed roughness values (1, 5, 10 micrometers).
  • ad hoc to paper The two outer monopoles mainly serve impedance matching and do not significantly affect the tilted beam pattern
    This assertion is used to justify the analytical model considering only the two middle monopoles, but no quantitative evidence is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Low-Cost Wideband Tilted Beam Antenna for Millimeter-wave Vehicle Applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/37Q7YCND

@misc{pith2026250608239,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Low-Cost Wideband Tilted Beam Antenna for Millimeter-wave Vehicle Applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/37Q7YCND}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08239}
}
read the original abstract

To facilitate vehicle coverage for millimeter-wave applications, this communication presents a low-cost, wideband tilted-beam antenna. A novel design is proposed in which a slot antenna is both directly excited and electromagnetically coupled to a monopole array. This slot-monopole configuration is inherently robust against substrate losses, enabling low-cost fabrication while maintaining high realized gain and compact size. Furthermore, the slot-fed structure effectively excites multiple resonant modes within the monopole array, resulting in a significantly enhanced bandwidth. Experimental results demonstrate that the antenna achieves a -10-dB impedance bandwidth of over 76.5% (20-44.78 GHz) and a peak realized gain of 6.1 dBi.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.08239 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Vehicle application of tilted beam: (a) home scenario, (b) mechanical beam tilt of broadside antenna, (c) tilted beam antenna [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dielectric loss and conductor loss simulation results. (a) electromagnetic wave transmission loss in different substrate (same thickness of 1.2 mm). (b) Microstrip line transmission loss in FR4 substrates of different roughnesses (same thickness of 0.1mm and length of 10 mm). x y z (a) (b) (c) (d) Coupling Slot Feeding Line SMPM Connector Ground Vias 1×4 Monopole Subarray L d1 W dm d2 d3 d4 d5 d6 d7 ls ws d8 o d9 r … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Far-field synthesis of broadside and monopole-like patterns. A ground [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Electric field distribution diagram of the slot. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bandwidth enhancement procedure: (a) Evolution of the proposed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Electric field along slot edge nearest to monopole array and monopole array current distribution at: (a) 26 GHz. (b) 31 GHz. (c) 36 GHz. (d) 41 GHz [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Simulated and measured |S11| of the proposed antenna. (a) (c) (b) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 -30 -20 -10 0 10 -20 -10 0 Realized gain (dBi) 10 -150 -120 -90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90 120 150 180 -30 -20 -10 0 10 -20 -10 0 Realized gain (…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Array beam scanning: (a) Simulation of a 1×4 rooftop array; (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_13.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Simulated and measured radiation patterns of the proposed titled beam antenna. (a) E-plane at 26 GHz. (b) H-plane at 26 GHz. (c) E-plane at 31 GHz. (d) H-plane at 31 GHz. (e) E-plane at 36 GHz. (f) H-plane at 36 GHz. (g) E-plane at 41 GHz. (h) H-plane at 41 GHz. 20 25…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A miniaturized dual-polarized active phased array antenna for 5G millimeter-wave applications,

    J. Li, Y. Zhu, Y. Hu, and W. Hong, “A miniaturized dual-polarized active phased array antenna for 5G millimeter-wave applications,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 618-622, Feb. 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    A low-profile dual-band coaperture monopolar antenna based on cross-layer folded structure,

    Y. C. Li, H. H. Tu, K. X. Wang, Q. Xue, and H. Wong, “A low-profile dual-band coaperture monopolar antenna based on cross-layer folded structure,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. , vol. 69, no. 10, pp. 6936- 6940, Oct. 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Aperture-coupled patch antenna with flat-top beam for microwave power transmission,

    D. M. Nguyen, N. D. Au, and C. Seo, “Aperture-coupled patch antenna with flat-top beam for microwave power transmission,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 2130-2134, Oct. 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Single-layer wideband tilted beam phased array antenn a for millimeter-wave vehicle communications,

    K. Chen, J. Xu, Q. Lin, Y. Zhu, and W. Hong, “Single-layer wideband tilted beam phased array antenn a for millimeter-wave vehicle communications,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol ., vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 3536- 3550, Mar. 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Substrate integrated waveguide (SIW) leaky-wave antenna with transverse slots,

    J. Liu, D. R. Jackson, and Y. Long, “Substrate integrated waveguide (SIW) leaky-wave antenna with transverse slots,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 20-29, Jan. 2012

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    A 17.7–20.2-GHz 1024-element K-band SATCOM phased -array receiver with 8.1-dB/K G/T, ±70° beam scanning, and high transmit isolation,

    K. K. W. Low, T. Kanar, S. Zihir, and G. M. Rebeiz, “A 17.7–20.2-GHz 1024-element K-band SATCOM phased -array receiver with 8.1-dB/K G/T, ±70° beam scanning, and high transmit isolation,” IEEE Trans . Microw. Theory Techn., vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 1769-1778, Mar. 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Tilted-beam high gain antenna system composed of a patch antenna and periodically arrayed loops,

    H. Nakano, S. Mitsui, and J. Yamauchi, “Tilted-beam high gain antenna system composed of a patch antenna and periodically arrayed loops,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 2917-2925, Jun. 2014

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Tilted beam formation using parasitic loop-based plates,

    H. Nakano, M. Toida, S. Okab e, and J. Yamauchi, “Tilted beam formation using parasitic loop-based plates,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 15, pp. 1475-1478, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Beam-tilting antenna with negative refractive index metamaterial loading,

    J. Li, Q. Zeng, R. Liu, and T. A. Denidni, “Beam-tilting antenna with negative refractive index metamaterial loading,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 16, pp. 2030-2033, 2017

    2017

  2. [10]

    Steering the beam of medium-to-high gain antennas using near-field phase transformation,

    M. U. Afzal and K. P. Esselle, “Steering the beam of medium-to-high gain antennas using near-field phase transformation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 65, no. 4, pp. 1680-1690, Apr. 2017

    2017

  3. [11]

    Controlling the most significant grating lobes in two-dimensional beam-steering systems with phase-gradient metasurfaces,

    K. Singh, M. U. Afzal, M. Kovaleva, and K. P. Esselle, “Controlling the most significant grating lobes in two-dimensional beam-steering systems with phase-gradient metasurfaces,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 1389-1401, Mar. 2020

    2020

  4. [12]

    Beam tilting appr oaches based on phase gradient surface for mmWave antennas,

    M. Akbari, M. Farahani, A. Ghayekhloo, S. Zarbakhsh, A. R. Sebak, and T. A. Denidni, “Beam tilting appr oaches based on phase gradient surface for mmWave antennas,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 4372-4385, Jun. 2020

    2020

  5. [13]

    Mu ltifunctional drone-based antenna for satellite communication,

    S. Zarbist and A. R. Sebak, “Mu ltifunctional drone-based antenna for satellite communication,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 7223-7227, Aug. 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    A dual-polarized two- dimensional beam-steer ing Fabry-Pérot cavity antenna with a reconfigurable partially reflecting surface,

    P. Xie, G. Wang, H. Li, and J. Liang, “A dual-polarized two- dimensional beam-steer ing Fabry-Pérot cavity antenna with a reconfigurable partially reflecting surface,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 16, pp. 2370-2374, 2017

    2017

  7. [15]

    Low-RCS beam-steering antenna based on reconfigurable phase gradient metasurface,

    J. Yu, W. Jiang, and S. Gong, “Low-RCS beam-steering antenna based on reconfigurable phase gradient metasurface,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 2016-2020, Oct. 2019

    2016

  8. [16]

    Dielectric resonator antenna with tilted beam,

    A. Mehmood, O. H. Karabey, and R. Jakoby, “Dielectric resonator antenna with tilted beam,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett. , vol. 16, pp. 1119-1122, 2017

    2017

  9. [17]

    Asymmetric half-bowtie antennas with tilted beam patterns,

    W. Dale Ake, M. Pour, and A. Me hrabani, “Asymmetric half-bowtie antennas with tilted beam patterns,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 67, no. 2, pp. 738-744, Feb. 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    A low-profile meta- surface-inspired antenna with tilted beam radiation,

    B. Zhu, D. Yang, J. Pan, Y. Chen, and S. Liu, “A low-profile meta- surface-inspired antenna with tilted beam radiation,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1803-1807, Aug. 2023

    2023

  11. [19]

    https://www.tuc.com.tw/en-us/products-detail/id/24

  12. [20]

    Circuit materials and high-frequency losses of PCBs,

    J. Coonrod, “Circuit materials and high-frequency losses of PCBs,” PCB Mag., pp. 24-29, Feb. 2012

    2012

  13. [21]

    Design and analysis of dual-polarized broadband microstrip patch antenna for 5G mmWave antenna module on FR4 substrate,

    G. Kim, and S. Kim, “Design and analysis of dual-polarized broadband microstrip patch antenna for 5G mmWave antenna module on FR4 substrate,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 64306-64316, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Design of composite microstrip-monopole antenna with 180° 1 dB beamwidth based on complementary sources concept,

    K. Sun, S. Liu, Y. Chen, Y. Zhao, and D. Yang, “Design of composite microstrip-monopole antenna with 180° 1 dB beamwidth based on complementary sources concept,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1577-1581, Aug. 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    C. A. Balanis. Antenna Theory: An alysis and Design . 4th ed., Wiley, 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    Monopole antenna at center of circular ground plane: Input impedance and radiation pattern,

    K. Awadalla and T. Maclean, "Monopole antenna at center of circular ground plane: Input impedance and radiation pattern," IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 151-153, March 1979. TABLE Ⅱ COMPARISON BETWEEN THE PROPOSED ANTENNA AND STATE-OF-THE-ART ANTENNAS WITH T...

    1979

  17. [25]

    31 49.4 5.6 45 0.64×1.70×0.16 High (RO4003C)

  18. [26]

    8 5.2 16.4 33 3.60×3.60×0.48 High (substrates of tan  < 0.0015)

  19. [27]

    4.4 8.0 6.2 44 2.20×1.76×0.4 High (RO4003C)

  20. [28]

    11.2 10.7 6 33 0.24×0.24×0.45 High (resonator of tan  < 0.0009)

  21. [29]

    † 4.75 32 5 40 1.36×1.16×0.025 High (RO5880)

  22. [30]

    † The ground plane size of 1.73λ0 × 1.73λ0 not included

    5.1 8.4 7.9 35 1.96×1.96×0.048 High (F4B with tan  = 0.002) This Work 32.4 76.5 6.1 46 0.59×1.10×0.17 Low (FR4) * The tilt angle is taken at the center frequency, where specified. † The ground plane size of 1.73λ0 × 1.73λ0 not included

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.