2. Contents
Introduction
1. Fabrication, design and parts
2. Reason for choice
Theory
1. Loop
2. Archery-target antenna
3. Impedance matching
4. VSWR
User design and future considerations
Performance analysis
Field testing
Conclusion
Credits
4. Design overview
Basic design and dimensions
from existing literature
Optimum dimensions
derived mainly from
experimentation and
occasionally FD-TD method
Modifications not tested
before include
1. the addition of secondary
rim
2. use with specified driven
element
Picture modified [2], p. 227
8. Introduction
Reason for choice
Good match with project
requirement
Relatively small size for its
Performance
Flexibility with modifications :
type of driven element used
configuration of reflectors
Characteristics
required
Archery-target
Antenna
High gain √
High directivity √
Fixed, narrow band √
WIFI frequency band √
10. 4:1 delay line type coax Balun
1λ loop feedpoint impedance (Ω) ≈ 80-150
L = 1/2λ
Causes 180° phase shiftas desired
Provides balanced input
Balun theory
Pictures from [5] and [6]
11. Endoresonance antenna: open cavity
Can be considered similar to waveguide
operation (resonant modes)
Archery-target antenna theory
Pictures from [1], p. 19
13. Archery-target antenna theory
Evolution of front reflectors
Maintaining backfire effect while
enlarging aperture size
Increasing directivity with
secondary rim on reflectors
16. Smith chart andVSRW of antenna with original
1λ line segment
Impedance matching
17. Practical approach to impedance matching
Since Smith chart of antenna line segment is favourable
And accuracy loss due to connectors and small physical
length of λ
Take x1 ≈ 0
Impedance matching
19. User design &
future considerations
User design
Handle/ portable
Rigid back wooden support
Weather resistant due to lacquered wood
Future considerations
Selective frequency using translucent aperture
Increase aperture efficiency by using better dielectric
Wider bandwidth using main conical
reflector and a smaller centre reflector
Pictures from [8], p. 115
20. Performance analysis
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
RSSI
signalQuality
2m
• RSSI -10 to 15
• Signal Quality 100
25m
• RSSI -50
• Signal Quality 80
2m
• RSSI -10 to 15
• Signal Quality 100
Loop A (Directed)
Loop A
Loop B
Loop B (Opposite)
2m
• RSSI -35
• Signal Quality 100
25m
• RSSI -58
• Signal Quality 80
2m
• RSSI -37
• Signal Quality 97
29. Conclusion
Fabrication
Our antenna is durable and portable
Well suited for the Objective
Overall Performance
Up to standard for field testing
Good Signal Quality
30. References and Credits
[1]A. Kumar, H.D. Hristov, Microwave cavity antennas , Norwood, MA : Artech
House , 1989
[2] M.Vidmar, “An Archery-TargetAntenna”, MicrowaveJournal, Vol. 48, No. 5,
pp.222-230, May 2005.
[3] J. Bernhard, E.Michielssen and L. C.Godara, Eds., “Antenna Parameters,
Various Generic Antennas and Feed Systems, and Available Software”, in
Handbook of antennas in wireless communications , Boca Raton, FL : CRC Press,
2002, ch. 5, sec. 3.2
[5]T.Tribuzio. (2011, Mar. 2). About Balun [Online]. Available:
http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/dir/jump2.cgi?ID=3767
[6]A.Vernucci. (2011, Mar. 2). A Simple 50-ohmSingle-Band Balun [Online PDF].
Available: www.qsl.net/i0jx/balun.pdf
[7] M. Rayner,A.D. Olver,A.D. Monk, “FD-TD design of short backfire antennas”,
IEE Proc.-Microw.Antennas Propag., Vol. 144, No. 1, pp. 1-6, Feb 1997
[8] G. S. Kirov, “Design of Short Backfire Antennas”, IEEE Antennas Propagat.
Mag.,Vol. 51, No. 6, pp. 110-120, Dec 2009
Editor's Notes
Points:
Group name, teammates
General introduction of our antenna
A form of short-backfire antenna
finite difference time domain (FDTD), numerical method, the governing equations are based on Maxwell’s equations
Why loop chosen in the end?, Pls include another photo showing e loop with its balun n connections exposed.Dipole
too common.Z-shape
Production difficulty,
As the antenna as a too narrow range, it was out of the wifi frequency and we were unable to repair.Loop.Even illumination, which is desired for sba’s driven element. Easy to construct and greater tolerance for inaccuracies with electrical length.
Directivity: short backfire antenna (SBFA) low sidelobe and backlobe compared to Yagi. ()
High Gain: the measured
Balanced input because of half wavelength, so it is as if no transmission line. The voltage, impedance etc is same as that of the other terminal, only different direction due to 180degree phase shift
Rationale for having secondary rim is for increased directivity, hopefully, we have more constructive than destructive interference and so works as desired
Rationale for having secondary rim is for increased directivity, hopefully, we have more constructive than destructive interference and so works as desired
2.41 Ghz = ?2.43 Ghz = ?2.46 Ghz = ?VSWR. An easy way to tell the efficiency of the antenna, the relative power transferred to the antenna/ amount of power lost.As you can see, not the best VSWR, but definitely good.
Better dielectric to reduce TE-mode phase velocity, so that annular reflector can be shrunk
A wifi adhoc network was created between 2 laptop, one of which connected to the wifi adapter and antenna.
Thereafter, a short distance test was conducted to measure the relative performance of the antenna with respect to distance.Inssider was used to log the signal strength and quality and the subsequent data was loaded on excel to generate the graph you see above.As you can see, signal strength(RSSI) drops immediately as we move the laptop away from the antenna, with the antenna directed towards the shifting laptop.Signal strength drops to -40dbi (25m range) and only resume back to -10dbi when the laptop was move back to the original spot (1m range).We tested the directivity of the laptop by pointing the antenna in the opposite direction.As expected, signal strength was unable to resume back to -10dbi this time.
In the antenna hunting assignment, there were given 3 locations to start from. UCC, YIH and E1. At every location, a sweep is done to make sure no other signals
For objective A, the ESP beacon was found to be in the general direction of the FASS ADM block. There were not obstructions in the line of sight between out antenna and the beacon. Hence the signal was very stable.
As shown here in this slide, the signal is consistently in in the range of -55 dBi
For objective B, the ESP beacon was found to be in the general direction of the right side of Temasek labs block. There were minor obstructions in the line of sight (trees in the picture).
The signal is extremely unstable, unlike in objective A. The sign reaches peaks of -50 dBi but falls off quickly. One explanation is that the router’s beacon interval is set quite high, hence there is momentary signal loss.
For objective C the ESP beacon was found to be in the general direction of the right side of Temasek labs block facing UCC. There were no obstructions in the line of sight, but still the signal is intermittent.
The signal is intermittent, which further supports our earlier explanation.
Here is a summary of the line of sight of the ESP beacons we have found from our given locations. We suspect the same router is used at T labs since the MAC address is the same but it is connected to 2 different antennas pointing at 2 directions.