Fundamental Limits and Design Guidelines For Miniaturizing Ultra-Wideband Antennas
Fundamental Limits and Design Guidelines For Miniaturizing Ultra-Wideband Antennas
Fundamental Limits and Design Guidelines For Miniaturizing Ultra-Wideband Antennas
Abstract
Fundamental physical limitations restrict an antenna's performance based on its electrical size. These fundamental limits are
of the utmost importance, since the minimum size needed to achieve a particular figure of merit can be determined from
them. In this paper, the physical limitations of antennas are reviewed in general, with particular emphasis on impedance
matching as it relates to ultra-wideband (UWB) antennas (high-pass response). Additionally, the use of antenna
miniaturization techniques to approach these limits is discussed. Using a spiral antenna as an example, guidelines are
presented for miniaturizing UWB antennas.
Keywords: Electrically small antennas; antenna theory; impedance matching; loaded antennas; log spiral antennas; antenna
miniaturization; ultra-wideband antennas
IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 51, No.4, August 2009 ISSN 1045-9243/20091$25 ©2009 IEEE 57
As such, the presented guidelines should be applicable to any of With proper choice of spherical-wave mode coefficients, it
the chosen miniaturization techniques. was shown that the highest possible directivity that can be achieved
using spherical-wave modes of order n ~ N is [8, 9]
N
2+2N.
2. Fundamental Physical Limitations Dmax = L(2n+l)=N (2)
n=l
The fundamental limits on antennas are determined from the Therefore, regardless of antenna size, the directivity is unbounded
physical characteristics of spherical modes ("modes of free space") as long as the number of modes used to express the field is unre-
that can be used to express the fields produced by an antenna. This stricted. The reason for this unbounded directivity stems from the
method involves enclosing the entire antenna structure, its trans- inherent assumption that any or all of the spherical-wave modes
mission line and generator, inside a sphere of radius a. The field can be excited, regardless of antenna size. Stratton [5] was credited
external to the sphere is expressed using a complete set of orthogo- by Chu as being the first to demonstrate the impracticality of
nal TE and TM spherical modes, which propagate radially outward. achieving an arbitrarily large directivity. In his unpublished notes,
Depending upon which modes are excited (modal coefficients), Stratton demonstrated that the series representing the source distri-
and the electrical size, ka ( k = 21C/ A) of the sphere, limits on bution diverges as the directivity of the system increases indefi-
directivity, radiation Q, and impedance matching can be calculated nitely. Therefore, it is physically impossible to excite all of the
under ideal conditions 1• These limitations are typically discussed modes with a finite-size antenna. However, there still wasn't a
with regards to electrically small antennas'. However, in their most clear physical reason for limiting the number of spherical modes
general form, these limitations apply to an antenna of arbitrary size. that could be excited. It was Chu [5] who introduced the concept of
Below, we review the fundamental limits on antennas, and discuss the quality factor, Q, to define a cutoff for each spherical mode. In
how they apply to UWB antennas. doing so, he provided a physical basis for limiting the number of
modes used in determining the maximum directivity of a given
antenna size. Before we review how Chu used the concept of Q to
limit the directivity, we first discuss the fundamental limit on an
2.1 Directivity antenna's Q.
__-------...-.--- f
mn
the neighborhood of the operating frequency [5]. Later, Collin and
Rothschild [14] published an exact theory for calculating the
radiation Q using a field-based technique, rather than equivalent
(a) circuits. Subsequently, Fante [11] generalized Collin's technique to
include both TE and TM modes. The exact equation for the mini-
&r
mum Q as given by Fante (when an arbitrary number of modes are
c~~ present) is [11]
2n-l 2n-5
00 00
L~pr
L:[
n=l
a;Qn+b;Q~ J ._..n=L:[
__l
a;Q~ +b;Qn J
_
n Q ~larger of , (4)
f[a; +b;]
n=l
f[a; +b;J
n=l
(b)
a; == m=O
n n
Figure 1. Equivalent circuits for the (a) TM mn and (b) TE mn where L: A"m /Anm b; == L: A"m IBnm/
I
2
,
2
, and A"m is a con-
modes of free space [5, 8]. m=O
stant (see [11] for definitions).
In order to determine the Q of each spherical mode, Chu had where M = 1 refers to the excitation of either the TE oI or TM ol
to separate the radiated energy (propagating) from the energy asso- mode (linearly polarized field), and M = 2 stands for equal excita-
ciated with the near field (non-propagating) external to the sphere. tion of both the TE oI and TM oI modes (the field can be either
Since the total system energy is infinite and the near-field compo- circularly or linearly polarized). It is remarked that for M = 2 ,
nents are nonlinear [5], this is not a trivial matter. Chu did this by Equation (5) provides the absolute lowest Q to be achieved by an
transforming the field problem into an equivalent circuit problem, antenna of a given size.
by replacing the space outside the sphere with a number of inde-
pendent equivalent circuits. Each equivalent circuit represented an
orthogonal spherical-wave mode used to describe the external
field. The equivalent circuits were obtained from the wave imped- 2.3 Maximum Directivity for a Specified
ance of each mode, which completely described the propagating
and non-propagating energy associated with each mode [5]. Using
Radiation Q
the recurrence formulas for spherical Bessel functions, Chu
obtained a partial-fraction expansion of the wave impedance for Previously, it was discussed that there was no mathematical
each mode. The resulting expansion was then interpreted as a high- limit for antenna directivity, as long as the number of excited
pass RLC ladder network, as shown in Figure 1. The network con- spherical modes was unbounded. To provide a means for restrict-
sisted of a cascade of series capacitances and shunt inductances, ing the number of modes, Chu was the first to use the concept of Q
with the resistive element at the end of the network representing to quantify the practicality of exciting a given spherical mode. The
the radiated (propagating) energy. The Q could then be calculated first attempt to define a practical limit for the directivity relied on
using the equivalent circuit for each mode by summing the energy the observation that the Q of spherical modes of order n is consid-
stored in each of the inductors and capacitors. In doing so, Chu ered "high" for lea < n. It can therefore be assumed that modes of
demonstrated that the lowest radiation Q can only be obtained if order n > ka are not easily excited, and do not significantly
the lowest-order spherical modes (TE ol and TM ol ) were excited contribute to the antenna's fields [5, 8]. Under this assumption, the
[5]. However, there were two issues with Chu's work that were cutoff point is taken to be ka = n . Further, recalling that the maxi-
later addressed by various authors. mum directivity that can be achieved using spherical modes of
order n ~ N is given by Equation (2),a limit for antenna directivity
First of all, Chu's analysis only considered the presence of can be obtained by substituting N = lea into Equation (2):
either TM or TE modes. Therefore, it was not complete. With this
in mind and following Chu's method, Harrington considered the Dnormal = (lea )2 + Zka . (6)
case where both TE and TM modes were present. In doing so,
Harrington showed that the absolute lowest achievable radiation Q This limit is commonly referred to as the "normal directivity"
was obtained by concurrent and equal excitation of the TM o1 and limit. We observe that as lea becomes large, the normal directivity
TE ol modes [13]. The second issue with Chu's work was that his reduces to that obtained by a uniformly illuminated circular aper-
(8)
where P~ (0) is the Legendre polynomial of the first kind. The sig-
IrQI-~"""""""""""1!-------!
nificance of the above expressions is that they demonstrate the
conditional nature of defining a limit for the directivity. For i
instance, if an antenna engineer wants to design an antenna that I I
meets the minimum Q limit of Equation (5), then the max imum
directivity, D max , must be 1.5 for M =1, and 3 for M =2 [5, 9].
If a directivity of 1.5 or 3 is not sufficient, then according to Equa- Figure 2. A possible bandpass response for the reflection coef-
tions (7) or (8), the antenna Q must be greater than the lower bound ficient that illustrates the Bode-Fano criterion.
given by Equation (5). It is also important to emphasize that this
result is applicable to an antenna of arbitrary size .
AO
2k+1
=_1_ (," S -{2k+l) -
2k + I L.:- 01
'" S-(2k+l)
L.- pI
J '
(12)
1 I
(10)
1
for k = 0,1,..., N -1, with N representing the multiplicity of the
transmission zeros associated with the load", Each integral is
evaluated over the frequency spectrum of a return-loss function,
In(!flrd), which is used instead of Ird
for purely mathematical
reasons. By using the calculus of residues, Fano evaluated Equa-
tion (10) to obtain the following expression for a high-pass
_ _ •• •• •••• •• • •••• •••••• • L - _
response:
4The integral equations can be written terms of either r I or I'2 . Figure 5. The ideal high-pass reflection-coefficient response.
where OJp2 and OJpl are the high and low edge-band frequencies
for which Irl s Ir0I (see Figure 2). Additionally, the center fre-
quency of the bandpass response is defined to be ~OJp2OJpI.
2.4.2 Fano-Bode Limit for the
Fano's solution for the bandpass response was in terms of a set of
equations [18]:
High-Pass Response
_ ._ ..TM
01
and TE
o1
'n =1
0 (22)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
ka
Figure 6. The in-band reflection coefficient I'0 as a function of
with
the cutoff size (ka = OJea ) or cutoff frequency. The cutoff size is
c
the smallest antenna size for which 0 Irl sIr I.
To demonstrate the impact of an infinite-stage matching net- The cubic equation was solved using MATLAB to find the
work (the third case), we must solve the set of equations given by roots of OJe for a given K . However, for any given K, only one of
Equation (11) using the equivalent circuit of the TM ol or TE ol the roots of OJe is real. The solution is shown graphically in Fig-
mode as the load. For this load there are two transmission zeros at
ure 6 (for the case of n =co). We remark that in Figure 6, OJe was
zero, implying a multiplicity of two (N = 2). For N = 2, the inte-
gral relations obtained from Equation (11) are as folJows: multiplied by a/c to convert it to the more-useful parameter ka .
The curve in Figure 6 for the n = co case should be interpreted as
Ir
follows. For a given 01 , there is a corresponding kea defining
(18)
the smallest electrical size for which the pass-band reflection coef-
Ir
ficient can equal 01 . To achieve this cutoff size, the frequency
and response of I' must be rectangular. That is, below k.«, the magni-
tude of the reflection coefficient must be one, and, for all frequen-
.broo OJ -4 In (1)
ifJ dOJ = 2"
-Jr [
A3 2" -3]
0-'37 Sr i .
(19)
Ir
cies above kea, it is exactly equal to 0\' Therefore, the curve in
Figure 6 corresponding to n = co cannot be realized in its entirety.
Since the matching network has infinite complexity, the form of The results in Figure 6 can be used in conjunction with the
Irll is that of the ideal rectangular high-pass response (see Fig-
directivity limits to define the realized gain limit. For the cases
where only the first one of the lowest-order spherical modes was
ure 5). Therefore, the left-hand side of Equations (18) and (19) can excited, the directivity is limited to 1.5 ('" 1.76 dB) for all ka [5].
be evaluated analytically. For the right-hand side, we must deter- For the case where both TM OJ and TEO! modes were excited
mine the A coefficients, which depend upon the load. To begin, the
equally, the maximum directivity that can be achieved for all ka is
equivalent circuit for the TE ol or TM ol mode is first normalized
3 [13]. Assuming the antenna is lossless, the realized gain is cal-
to the free-space impedance, 170 ' The impedance, in terms of the culated using the results from Figure 6 and the corresponding
complex frequency s = jOJ, seen looking into the equivalent circuit directivity. The resulting realized gain curves are shown in Fig-
is then given by ure 7.
:. . /":""~ ~.-:
. ",;'
.
o by
-iii : /
,;//
~,.,...?
/:
:
vp
I 1
= fiC = ..r;;; '
~ -5 ..........:.../ ..../ ..;
'=
".
:I
I
I (23)
C) J: I
"Cl / : I
,~ -10 .. ........( ..;... j ... ...
'i; 1 : /'
! J : .
... I
i
:' - - TM01 or TE01' n =1 where L is the series inductance per unit length, C is the shunt
-15 ......./I .......:..... capacitance per unit length, and G is a geometrical factor". The
I
I !:
r.
-- - TM 01 orTE01' n = m phase velocity can therefore be controlled using the series induc-
'
I i :
.
_ ._ ..TM
01
and TE ' n
o1
=1 tance and shunt capacitance per unit length of the antenna. For the
biconical antenna, this means controlling the self-inductance of the
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 cone and the capacitance between the two cone halves. By doing
ka so, we can achieve the proper electrical delay to attain resonance ,
or to form a radiation band for a spiral antenna, regardless of
Figure 7. The lowest achievable cutoff frequency for a mini- physical size. As we will show, this will improve the antenna's Q.
mum-Q antenna in terms of the realized gain.
Techniques that can be used to mod ify the inductance and
capacitance of an antenna structure involve either material or reac-
3. Antenna Miniaturization tive loading. Material loading refers to the application of materials
that have f r > 1 and/or IJr > 1. This is the most generic approach ,
making it applicable to any antenna design . However, the material
Having already discussed the fundamental limits on radiation
density can make this approach prohibitive for applications that
Q, directivity, and impedance match ing for antennas, the remainder
require lightweight antenna designs . Additionally, material losses
of the paper focuses on how to approach the impedance-matching
can playa significant role in their applicability. For example, the
limit with regards to electrically small UWB antennas . Since the
frequency-dependent loss of currently available magnetic or mag-
impedance-matching limit is based on a minimum-Q antenna, it
neto-dielectric materials prevents their use above VHF. On the
can only be approached using a low-Q antenna design . The meth-
other hand, reactive loading refers to any method that enhances the
ods that can be used to approach this limit can be divided into two
self-inductance and/or shunt capacitance within the antenna's
categories: 1.) minimum-Q antenna designs; 2.) min iaturization of
structure. A classic example of inductive loading is the meandering
preexisting antenna designs to lower their Q. The first approach is
of the conductor forming the antenna, such as a meander-line
about designing an antenna that utilizes the entire volume of the
dipole. Not only is this approach lightweight, but it is also applica -
radian sphere such that there is no stored energy inside the sphere,
ble for any frequency range. However, for some antennas, it can be
and only the lowest spherical modes exist outside it (TM ol and difficult if not impossible to implement capacitive and/or inductive
TE ol ) [5]. Wheeler proposed two such antenna designs, the loading.
spherical inductor and the spherical-cap dipole, which could come
close to achieving this goal [6, 28]. A characteristic of these
designs is that they occupy a significant portion of the radian
sphere. Therefore, for applications that require conformal or low- 3.2 Dipole Antenna Example
profile antennas , the first approach is not attractive . The second
approach involves the miniaturization of a preexisting antenna To illustrate how miniaturization improves an antenna's Q,
design to improve its Q at frequencies where it is electrically small. we consider a wire dipole that fits inside a sphere of radius a. The
In the remainder of this paper, we will discuss this approach. We length of the dipole is thus equal to 2a . Under these constraints,
begin by discussing the concept of antenna miniaturization. Subse- the dipole will have its first resonance at lea '" 70/2 7, which can be
quently, we demonstrate how the miniaturization of a physically
reduced by increasing the self inductance of the wire. Without
small dipole can improve its Q. Using such concepts, we then
physically modifying the dipole, this can be readily accomplished
develop basic guidelines for miniaturizing UWB antennas .
by using a Method of Moments code, such as NEC [31]. In NEC, a
distributed or lumped impedance (parallel or series circuit) can be
assigned to each wire segment that forms the dipole. In this case,
3.1 Concept each segment was assigned the same distributed inductance, L,
(uniform loading) thereb y increasing the inductance per unit length
The concept of miniaturization involves reducing the phase
velocity of the wave guided by the antenna structure to establish
resonance or coherent radiation when the antenna is electrically
61n general,the characteristic impedance of an antenna is frequency
small. To illustrate how this can be accompl ished, we use the anal-
ogy between an antenna and a transmission line. Consider a center- dependent, unless the geometry naturally scales with frequency (a
fed infinite biconical antenna - a type of a spherically radial constant geometrical factor) .
wavegu ide - guiding a spherical wave [7]. This is analogous to an 7The first resonance of a dipole occurs at lea = 70/2 only if the
infinitely long uniform transmission line guiding a plane wave [29, current distribution is perfectly sinusoidal and the wire radius is
30]. infinitesimally small.
In designing a miniaturized broadband antenna, it is impor- It is important to note that the tapered loading profile pro-
tant to consider the manner in which the antenna is miniaturized. vides the best overall performance. However, uniform loading
As an example, consider the miniaturization of a spiral antenna by results in the best low-frequency performance, at the expense of
a factor m. This miniaturization factor can be achieved by uni- high-frequency performance. This is illustrated in Figure 15, which
formly loading the spiral such that the phase velocity is reduced by compares the broadside realized gain for a spiral antenna with a
a factor m everywhere along the spiral. On the other hand, the same uniform loading profile and an exponentially tapered loading pro-
miniaturization factor can also be achieved by gradually decreasing file. In each case, the antennas were matched to purely real load
the phase velocity along the spiral using a tapered loading profile. impedances that maximized their overall performance. From Fig-
An obvious question is whether one approach is better than the ure 15, it was evident that below about 600 MHz, the uniformly
other. To answer this question, let us consider the uniform loading loaded spiral had the highest realized gain. As all three antennas
of the six-inch-diameter spiral shown in Figure 12. For a frequency were lossless with almost the same directivity (see Figure 14), this
fo, there is a radiation band the location of which is shown in Fig- higher realized gain can be attributed to improved matching. That
ure 12, prior to miniaturization. It is obvious that the spiral is elec- is, the uniformly loaded spiral had the lowest Q in this region as
trically large enough to naturally establish a radiation band at /0' seen in Figure 13. However, above 600 MHz, the realized gain of
Therefore, its performance at /0 is sufficient, and needs no further both the unloaded and tapered spirals was 5 to 8 dB better, which
was a significant improvement. This improvement was a product
improvement. When the spiral is miniaturized by a factor m using a
of a slightly higher directivity (1-2 dB), and better matching in both
uniform loading profile, the location of the radiation band associ-
cases due to their lower Q. Figure 15 illustrates an important aspect
ated with /0 will then shift inward, as shown in Figure 12. How-
of miniaturizing a broadband antenna that was alluded to earlier in
ever, in doing so, the size of the radiation band is also reduced by a our discussion of broadband impedance matching. That is, the per-
factor of m. Therefore, after miniaturization, the spiral now radiates formance of a broadband antenna can be further improved at fre-
from an electrically smaller aperture at the frequency /0' implying quencies where it is electrically small as long as one is willing to
a higher antenna Q. Thus, while uniform loading can improve per- sacrifice performance at frequencies where it is electrically large.
formance at frequencies where the spiral is electrically small Therefore, there exists an inherent tradeoff in the miniaturization
(ka < 1), it can also lead to worse performance at those frequencies of broadband antennas, and this is a consequence of the funda-
(ka > 1) where the spiral could already form a radiation band. mental limits associated with the radiation Q.
1.8 - - - ka - 0.1
··· ······ ka - 0.15 : :
... . ···· ·ka - 0.15
1.6 - - . ka - 0.2 : :" . . .. .. .... .. ..... .
1.6 _ ._ . . ka - 0.2
~
-=-.k_a_-_0_.25-t /
,/ .,
1.4 rL--=-
-=-
-=- _ , : . . ~ :- . - - ka - 0.25
1.4
: .:. / :"
,/
1.2 .. ...:- \ : ; . . 1.2 .
el' .... .... .............: .
a
0.8
0.8
0.6 ·· · ·· · : · ·· ··· ·!·······[·······:· · ·· · · ·:· ·· ··· · t· ···(·· · · t" · · · · ~ · · · · · i··· . 0.6 ..........: ! !" ; .
0.4 · · ··· · ~·· · ·· · ·,·······:······ r· ·· · · : · · · · · · ·(" · · · ··: ···· · · j· · · · · · · ·! · · · · · · · 1· · · · · · 0.4 .... •. . : .•••.•••••••.••• : .•.•.•••••...... -:..••• ..... . . . . . . . !
.
.
Figure 9. The normalized dipole Q (at a fixed ka) as a function Figure 10. The dipole Q as a function of kma = mka.
of the miniaturization factor, m.
aI 50
a 40
"1 500
400
30 300
20 200 ~ ~ "': .: : ~ .
10 , : ; .
100 ········:········· .. ·~~:4.:.".::~·,: · ·····j/!.~· ~·, ·~ J::;,/ ~.~. >
~OO 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
frequency (MHz)
Figure 11. The spiral antenna's Q as a function of the effective Figure 13. A comparison of the radiation Q for a six-inch-
electrical size kma for fixed values of ka. diameter spiral antenna having uniform and exponential
inductive loading profiles.
i" /i - ' i i -
14, pp . 18-25 .
68 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 51, No. 4, August 2009
12. R. P. Feynman, R. Leighton, and M. Sands, The Feynmen Lec- 25. H. A. Wheeler, "Wideband Impedance Matching," Wheeler
tures on Physics: Volume 1, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Addison- Labs Tech. Rep. 418, May 1950, available at
Wesley, 1961. http://www.arlassociates.net.
13. R. F. Harrington, "Effect of Antenna Size on Gain, Bandwidth, 26. M. C. Villalobos, H. D. Foltz, 1. S. McLean, and I. S. Gupta,
and Efficiency," J. Res. Nat. Bureau Stand., 64D, January 1960, "Broadband Tuning Limits on UWB Antennas Based on Fano's
pp. 1-12. Formulation," IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and
Propagation Digest, July 2006, pp. 171-174.
14. R. E. Collin and S. Rothschild, "Evaluation of Antenna Q,"
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-12, January 27. H. L. ThaI, "New Radiation Q Limits for Spherical Wire
1964, pp. 23-27. Antennas," IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-
54, 10, October 2006, pp. 2757-2763.
15. J. S. McLean, "A Re-Examination of the Fundamental Limits
on the Radiation Q of Electrically Small Antennas," IEEE Trans- 28. A. R. Lopez, "Fundamental Limitations of Small Antennas:
actions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-44, 5, May 1996, pp. Validation of Wheeler's Formulas," IEEE Antennas and Propaga-
672-676. tion Magazine, 48, 4, August 2006, pp. 28-36.
16. W. Geyi, "Physical Limitations of Antenna," IEEE Transac- 29. S. A. Schelkunoff, "Theory of Antennas of Arbitrary Size and
tions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-51, 8, August 2003, pp. Shape," Proceedings ofthe IR.E., 29, 9, September 1941, pp. 493-
2116-2123. 521.
17. H. W. Bode, Network Analysis and Feedback Amplifier 30. J. D. Kraus and R. J. Marhefka, Antennas, Third Edition, New
Design, New York, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1945. York, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 2001.
18. R. M. Fano, "Limitations on the Broadband Matching of Arbi- 31. G. J. Burke, E. K. Miller, and A. J. Poggio, "The Numerical
trary Impedances," Journal of the Franklin Institute, 249, 1, Janu- Electromagnetics Code (NEC) - A Brief History," IEEE Interna-
ary and February 1960, pp. 57-83, 139-154. tional Symposium on Antennas and Propagation Digest, June
2004,3,pp.2871-2874.
19. R. M. Fano, Theoretical Limitations on the Broadband
Matching of Arbitrary Impedances, PhD dissertation, Massachu- 32. A. D. Yaghjian and S. R. Best, "Impedance, Bandwidth, and Q
setts Institute of Technology, 1947. of Antennas," IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation,
AP-53, 4, April 2005, pp. 1298-1324.
20. A. R. Lopez, "Review of Narrowband Impedance-Matching
Limitations," IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, 46, 4, 33. M. Lee, B. A. Kramer, C.-C. Chen, and J. L. Volakis, "Distrib-
August 2004, pp. 88-90. uted Lumped Loads and Lossy Transmission Line Model for
Wideband Spiral Antenna Miniaturization and Characterization,"
21. D. M. Pozar, Microwave Engineering, Second Edition, New IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-55, 10,
York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1998. October 2007, pp. 2671-2678.
22. R. C. Hansen, Electrically Small, SuperDirective, and. Super- 34. B. A. Kramer, C.-C. Chen, and J. L. Volakis, "Size Reduction
conducting Antennas, New York, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2006. of a Low-Profile Spiral Antenna Using Inductive and Dielectric
Loading," IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 7,
23. H. A. Wheeler, "The Wide-Band Matching Area for a Small 2008, pp. 22-25.
Antenna," IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, AP-
31,2, March 1983, pp. 364-367. 35. R. Bawer and J. J. Wolfe, "The Spiral Antenna," I.R.E. Inter-
national Convention Record, March 1960. @
24. G. L. Matthaei, L. Young, and E. M. T. Jones, Microwave Fil-
ters, Impedance-Matching Networks and Coupling Structures,
New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1964.