MULTI-BAND AND BROADBAND ANTENNAS

FOR MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS APPLICATIONS

P.S.HALL

Department of Electronic, Electrical and Computer Engineering,

The University of Birmingham,
Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK, B15 2TT
p.s.hall@bham.ac.uk

ABSTRACT
The impact of new system demands on antenna design forms the starting point for this
review paper. In response to these demands, there are now many different types of
multiband antennas, with multiband planar inverted F antennas dominating the mobile
handset application area. Broadband antennas continue to be studied and the new ultra
wideband requirement is fuelling many new antenna configuration studies. Other
technologies, such as fractals and metamaterials, have an impact in this topic and their
significance is also examined.

INTRODUCTION
Mobile communications continues to be a dominating application for many antenna
designers. Cell phone systems are still expanding as providers aim for increasing
capacity to enable many new user services. In parallel with this, wireless local area
networks (WLAN) are gaining in importance. The convergence of these two systems
put further demands upon antenna designers. So these systems present the need for
antenna operation in a number of bands ranging from around 800 MHz to above 2.5
GHz, with an additional important WLAN band between 5 and 6 GHz. Reception of
global positioning system signals is also necessary. Table 1 shows the frequency
ranges of these systems. The likely advent of ultra wideband (UWB) communication
systems will pose further interesting challenges. The need for multiple antenna
architectures for MIMO systems poses additional problems.

Thus, there is a current need for System Frequency range

mobile communications antennas (MHz)
to cover a band of nearly 3 to 1 GSM 824 - 894
width, either by multiple or broad EGSM 880 - 960
band operation. The addition of DCS 1710 - 1880
the UWB requirement will PCS 1850 - 1990
increase this to well over a UMTS 824 - 894
decade. Of course, it is unlikely 1710 - 2170
that in the near future all of this Bluetooth, Wireless LAN 2400-2483
will be handled by a single 802.11b/g
antenna with a broadband Wireless LAN 802.11a 5150-5250
characteristic and what is more GPS 1559-1610
likely is a multiple band antenna Table 1 Frequency range of various mobile
for the various mobile and communication systems
WLAN bands and a single
broadband antenna for UWB. However there is also a vision for a single antenna to do
all this, with reconfiguration both to increase flexibility and also to future proof in the
event of new bands being released.

MULTI-BAND ANTENNAS
Ever since the early days of mobile phones there has been a drive for multiple band
antennas. The first phones had external antennas, usually formed by pull-out or fixed
whips or helices. These were made to operate at two bands, for example GSM and
DCS, by folding the wire or by changing the pitch of the helix, [1]. Although there
have been many forms of multiband patch antennas, [2], it was clear that the patch
was too large for small mobile terminals, and the planar inverted F antenna, (PIFA),
was used for this application, first in dual band form, [3] and then in multi band form,
[4,5]. There have since been
many types of multiband
PIFA, as shown in Fig 1. The
primary design strategy is to
create a structure with (a) (b) (c) (d)

multiple resonators, by either L

adding extra resonators to an C
initial antenna or by
perturbing the antenna (e) (f) (g) (h)

structure itself to possess

extra resonances. The first
method means that to fit the
multiple band antennas into (i) (j) (k)

the same space as the

equivalent single band one, Figure 1 Examples of Multiple Band PIFAs
the size of each resonator (a) [3], (b) [6], (c) [7], (d) [8], (e) [9], (f) [10], (g) [11],
must be reduced. The second (h,i) [12], (j) [13], (k) [14]
method does not have this
drawback, but the resonances are usually harder to control. In some examples it is not
clear which strategy has been used. As an example of the first strtegy, Fig 1a, [3],
shows an L shaped resonator, for the low band and the smaller, square one, for the
high band, where the solid circles are the feed point and the open circles the short
circuit points. In a single band antenna at the low frequency the square resonator
would occupy the whole of the area, and thus dual banding sacrifices some of the low
band bandwidth. However the height of the top plate can be increased to offset this. In
Fig 1b, [6], this concept is extended to three resonators. In Fig 1c and d, [7,8], the low
band resonators are bent around the high band one or dual C slots are used. In Fig 1e,
[9], a slotted ground plane is used, while in Fig 1f, [10] lumped element inductors and
capacitors positioned across a central gap are used. In Fig 1g, 1h, 1i and 1j,
[11,12,13], resonators of different heights are used. The antenna of Fig 1k, [14], is a
derivative of the Sierpinski gasket monopole that has been cut in half and folded
down parallel to the ground plane. The multiple resonances are created by the
triangular cuts in the conductor.

In most of these types the radiated polarisation is not well controlled, although this is
not usually important due to the high depolarisation in the local scattering
environment and the variations in the way users hold the phone. Low specific
absorption rate, (SAR), is also important for handset antennas and designs using
material loading, [15] have recently been investigated.

It is clear that there are many ways to create a small multiband antenna, and it is hard
to be dogmatic about any preferred form. Many of those in Fig 1 meet the handset
manufacturer’s requirements and then choice will come down to particular installation
and manufacturing issues.
Not removed

Fractal monopole antennas have been Z 4.65cm

investigated and proposed both for

h0.65 x (0.65)2

h0.75 x (0.75)2
h0.65 x (0.65)3

h0.75 x (0.75)3
h1=h0.65=4cm

h1=h0.75=4cm
h1=h0.5=4cm

h0.5 x (0.5)2
h0.5 x (0.5)3

h0.65 x 0.65

h0.75 x 0.75
handset applications and for base

h0.5 x 0.5
stations. It is clear that, for example, a X 0.5 ratio 0.65 ratio 0.75 ratio Y
Sierpinski gasket monopole, [16,17], Fig (a) (b) (c)

2, has useful multiband features, such as Fig 2 Sierpinski gasket monopoles

the use of different iteration ratios to
control the band spacing arbitrarily. However, they are not as small or as convenient
for handset use as PIFAs, but can be used for base stations. Fig 2 shows a Sierpinski
gasket with various iteration ratios.

Another form of multiple band monopole is the multiple ring antennas shown in Fig
3, [18]. Each of the four bands in the example shown has a wider bandwidth that a
Sierpinski of equivalent height. It is believed that this is due to different and curved,
shape close to the feed point. In the ring design
Z h
1
h = 86 mm
1
the divergence of the two conductors, the ring
h = 43 mm
2
h = 21.5 mm
and the ground plane, is slower and smoother.
This relates to strategy for good wideband
3
h 2 h = 10.75 mm
4
h = 5.5 mm
antenna design noted in the next section. Again
h 3
h5 5
h 4

Y
X 15 cm variation of the band spacing can be controlled
Fig 3 Multiple ring monopole to some extent by the relative radius and width
of the rings, [19].

BROADBAND ANTENNAS
In a 1989 patent, [20], Oliver Lodge,
gave a very early description of a
wideband antenna, shown in Fig 4, and
wrote his strategy for best wideband
action as, “cones or triangles or other
such diverging surfaces with the vertices
adjoining and their larger areas
spreading out into space”. Many others
developed the concept of smooth
diverging surfaces to make a variety of
wideband bicones and horns,
[21,22,23,24]. Planar wideband dipoles
have been made in various shapes. Fig
5a shows the circular disc, [25], Fig 5b
the diamond dipole, [26] and Fig 5c the Figure 4 Antenna from
elliptical disc dipole, [27]. Fig 6a shows Lodge’s 1989 patent
a horn shaped self complimentary
antenna (HSCA), [28] and Fig 6b the planar inverted cone antenna (PICA), [29].
 These types of wideband antenna can be
(a) (b) (c) made either in monopole form as in Fig 6b
or as a dipole as in Fig 5 and 6a. In dipole
Figure 5 Wideband dipoles form they can have both arms of the dipole
(a) disc, (b), diamond, (c) ellipse etched on the same side of the substrate or
(Feed is at centre of dipole and lower on opposite sides. The dipoles need feeding
half is located on rear of substrate for with a balanced two-strip line; it can be
clarity) simpler to make this with the strips on either
side of the substrate, although strips on the
same substrate can make the application of matching components easier. A balun is
required if an unbalanced circuit output is to be used. In some cases balanced
transceiver outputs are used and this simplifies the connection. If a balun is not used
then the antenna pattern becomes 29.2mm
30.6mm
distorted, cross polarisation increases and
the efficiency may be reduced. The 76.2mm
monopole form has been demonstrated
29.9mm
using either a ground plane normal to the
60.7mm
planar monopole, as in Fig 6b or with a 22mm

coplanar microstrip feed. In this the

microstrip ground plane is on the opposite
side of the substrate to the monopole and 0.64mm
Ground plane
stops at the base of the monopole. The 50 Feed
strip connects to the monopole. This a) HSCA b) PICA
configuration allows matching circuits in
microstrip, and gives an architecture that is Figure 6. HSCA and PICA antennas
very easy to integrate with a handset
printed circuit board. The advantage of the dipole arrangements is that they give very
much better controlled polarisation and are useful where this is important. Slots in
semi-circular disc monopoles [30], and wideband slots of similar shape to the dipoles
in Fig 5 have also been proposed, [31,31].

Fig 7 illustrates typical performance of microstrip fed elliptical wideband monopoles,

designed to operate over the 3 to 10GHz band. The ground plane sizes were 40 x 80
mm2 and designed to be representative of a typical handset. It can be seen that for all
monopoles, input return loss of better than -7dB can be achieved over the band, whilst
the low frequency cut off depends on the geometry. If the antennas are to be used for
very wideband signals then the
transient performance is also
important, [24]. The UWB band
covers the ISM band around 5GHz
and much work is currently being
done to produce wideband antennas
of the form above that have a notch
in their frequency response. Slots
and notches in the dipole or
monopole structure have been
demonstrated, for example, [33].

Fig 7 Input return loss of microstrip fed

elliptical monopoles
Large ellipse = 25 x 18mm,
small ellipse = 18 x 12mm
Microstrip ground plane = 40 x 80mm
When dipoles are placed over a ground plane to form a unidirectional beam it is usual
to space them by a quarter of a wavelength. This gives some difficulties in the design
of wideband planar dipoles. In many cases absorber is used to eliminate ground plane
reflections, [34], but this reduces the gain. Electromagnetic bandgap materials, and in
particular, artificial magnetic conductors (AMCs) can be used. Fig 8 shows results for
an antenna that has a bandwidth of approximately 2 to 1 for well behaved patterns and
gain above 6dBi. The dipole with square shaped arms is 48mm long and the antenna
thickness, including the AMC is 5.5mm. The AMC ground plane is 140 x 140mm2.
0
14

-5 12

-10 10

8
S11 (dB)

-15

Gain (dB)
6
-20

4
-25
2
-30
0

-35
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Frequency (GHz)
Frequency (GHz)

Fig 8 Input return loss and gain of wideband dipole on artificial magnetic
conductor

CONCLUSIONS
The proliferation of bands for mobile communications coupled with the convergence
of mobile and WLAN systems continue to give rise to severe demands for multiband
and broad band antennas. These demands are further extended by the proposals for
ultra wideband systems. Antenna designers are responding with a large number of
alternative types which can meet the requirements and whose take up then depends on
the terminal specifics and manufacturing considerations. New ideas such as fractals
and metamaterials also give rise to new configurations. In general terms, fractals have
been found to be too large for handsets and the use has been limited. It is too early to
tell whether metamaterials will be significant for this application.

There has not been space in this paper to review other aspects of mobile
communications systems, such as ‘multiple in multiple out’ (MIMO) antennas and
reconfigurable antennas. Multiband MIMO antennas are now being studied as are
reconfigurable antennas using MEMS switches or actuators. It is expected that both of
these antenna types will be increasingly important in the future.

REFERENCES
1 Ying, Z., “Multiband non uniform helical antennas” 1996-10, US 006122102, WO-9815058
2 James,J.R. and Hall,P.S. (editors) "Handbook of Microstrip Antennas", (Peter Perigrinus,
IEE, London, 1989)
3 Liu, Z. D. and Hall, P. S., “Dual Band Antennas for Hand Held Portable Telephones”,
Electronics Letters, 28th March 1996, 32, No.7, pp.609-610
4 Ying, Z., “Design of high efficiency multi-band antennas for modern mobile phones”, AP
2000, Davos, Switzerland, 2000
5 Martinez-Vazques, M., Litsche, O., Geissler, M. and Heberling, D., “Novel triple band
antennas for personal communications handsets”, IEEE, Ant & Prop Soc Symposium, June 2002
6 Song C.T.P., Hall P.S., Ghafouri-Shiraz H., and Wake D., “Triple band planar inverted F
antennas for handheld devices”, Electron Letters, Vol. 36, Issue 2, 20th Jan. 2000, pp 112 - 114
7 Lin F.L. and Chiu C.W., “Compact dual-band PIFA with multi-resonators”, IEE Electronics
letters, Vol. 38, No. 12, pp.538-539, June 2002
8 Shin Y.S., Kim B.N., K W.I. and Park S.O., “GSM/DCS/IMT-2000 Triple band Built in
antenna for wireless terminals”, IEEE Ant and Wireless Prop Letters, Vol. 3, 2004, pp 104-107
9 Row Jeen-Sheen, “Planar Inverted-F antenna with slotted ground plane”, Microwave and
Optical Technology Letters, pp 72-75, Vol. 39, No. 1, 5th Oct 2003
10 Lie G. K. H. and Murch R. D., “Compact dual-frequency PIFA designs using LC resonators”,
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, Vol. 49 No 7, 2001, pp 1016-1019
11 Ollikainen J., Kivekäs O., Toropainen A., and Vainikainen P., “Internal dual-band patch
antenna for mobile phones” Proceedings of the AP2000 Millennium Conference on Antennas &
Propagation. Davos, Switzerland, 9-14 April 2000
12 Ollikainen J., Fischer M. and Vainikainen P., “Thin dual-resonant stacked shorted patch
antenna for mobile communications” Electronics Letters, Vol. 35, No. 6, pp 437-438, 1999
13 Gou Y. X. and Tan H. S., “New compact six-band internal antenna”, IEEE Transactions on
Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, Vol. 3, pp.295-297, 2004
14 Song C.T.P., Hall P.S., and Ghafouri-Shiraz H., ”Shorted fractal Sierpinski monopole
antenna”, IEEE Transactions on Ant and Prop, pp. 2564-2570, Vol. 52, No. 10, Oct 2004
15 Panagamuwa, C. J., Kitra, M. I.,McEvoy, P., Vardoxoglou, James, J. R., “Multi-band material
loaded low-SAR antenna for mobile handsets”, IEE Seminar, ` Wideband and multi-band
antennas and arrays`, Birmingham, UK, 7 Sept, 2005
16 C. Puente, J. Romeu, and A. Cardama, “Fractal-shaped antennas,” Frontiers in
Electromagnetics, Werner and Mittra, Eds. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press, 2000, pp. 48–93.
17 C. Puente, J. Romeu, R. Pous, and A. Cardama, “On the behavior of the Sierpinski multiband
antenna,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propagat., vol.46, pp. 517–524, Apr. 1998.
18 Song, C T P, Hall,P S and Ghafouri-Shiraz, H, “Multiband multiple ring monopole antennas”,
IEEE AP-S Trans, vol 51, no 4, April 2003, pp 722-729
19 Mirkarmali, A.; Hall, P.S.; Soleimani, M., “Elliptical multiple ring monopole antennas”, IEE
Seminar on Wideband and Multi-band Ant and Arrays, (Ref. No. 2005/11059), 2005 Pp123 - 128
20 Lodge, O., “Electrical telegraphy”, US Patent 609,154, August 16, 1898
21 Carter P.S., “Short Wave Antenna,” U.S. Patent 2,175,252 (October 10, 1939).
22 Brillouin, L. N., “Broadband antenna”, US Patent 2,454,766, November 30, 1948
23 Wohlers R. J., “The GWIA, an extremely wide bandwidth low dispersion antenna”, 20th Symp
of USAF antenna R&D prog, 1970
24 Schantz, H.G., “Introduction to ultra-wideband antennas”, 2003 IEEE Conference on Ultra
Wideband Systems and Tech, 16-19 Nov. 2003, pp1 – 9
25 Thomas M. et al, June 7, 1994, “Wideband Arrayable Planar Radiator”, US Patent 5,319,377.
26 Schantz H G, Fullerton L; “The Diamond Dipole: A Gaussian Impulse Antenna”, IEEE Trans
Ant and Prop, 2001.
27 Stohr W, January 16, 1968,”Broadband elliptical dipole antenna”, US Patent 3,364,491.
28 A.Saitou, T.Iwaki, K.Honjo, K,Sato, T.Koyama and K.Watanabe, “Practical Realization of
Self-Complementary Broadband Antenna on Low-Loss Resin Substrate for UWB applications”,
2004 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium, Fort Worth, Texas, June 2004.
29 Seong-Youp Suh, Warren L. Stutzman and William A. Davis, “A New Ultrawideband Printed
Monopole Antenna: The Planar Inverted Cone Antenna (PICA)”, IEEE Transaction on Antennas
and Propagation, Vol. 52, No. 5, May 2004
30 Chan, K.C.L.; Yi Huang, “Slot-inserted semi-circular disc antenna for wideband
communications”, IEE Seminar on Wideband and Multi-band Antennas and Arrays, 2005. (Ref.
No. 2005/11059) 2005 Page(s):47 – 52
31 Li, P.; Liang, J.; Chen, X, “;Planar circular slot antenna for ultra wideband applications”, IEE
Seminar on Wideband and Multi-band Ants, 2005. (Ref. No. 2005/11059), 2005 Pp147 – 152
32 Schantz, H.G.; Barnes, M, “The COTAB UWB magnetic slot antenna”,
2001. IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium, Volume 4, 8-13 July
2001 Page(s):104 - 107 vol.4
33 Schantz, H.G.; Wolenec, G.; Myszka, E.M., “Frequency notched UWB antennas”, 2003 IEEE
Conference on Ultra Wideband Systems and Technologies, 16-19 Nov. 2003 Page(s):214 – 218
34 Foster, R N, Hee, T W and Hall P S, “Ultra Wideband Dual Polarised Arrays”, IEEE Int.
Workshop on Antenna Technology, Small Antennas, Novel Metamaterials, IWAT05, Singapore,
March 2005, pp219-222