Sei sulla pagina 1di 9
Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Electronics and Communications (AEÜ)

journal homepag e: www.elsevier.c om/locate/aeue

(AEÜ) journal homepag e: www.elsevier.c om/locate/aeue Regular paper Simple EBG surface for X-band radar cross

Regular paper

Simple EBG surface for X-band radar cross section reduction

M. Gholipour, N. Azadi-Tinat , J. Ghalibafan

Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Robotic, Shahrood University of Technology, P.O. Box 3619995161, Shahrood, Iran

of Technology, P.O. Box 3619995161, Shahrood, Iran article info Article history: Received 19 May 2018

article info

Article history:

Received 19 May 2018 Accepted 2 January 2019

Keywords:

Electromagnetic Band-Gap (EBG) Artificial Magnetic Conductor (AMC) Radar Cross Section Reduction (RCSR)

abstract

In this paper, an Electromagnetic Band-Gap (EBG) structure that consists of the two type square patch located on the FR4 substrate is proposed. The equivalent circuit model of the unit cell is presented and analyzed. The reflection phases of the proposed structure validates the feature of radar cross section reduction. The results show the wide operation frequency band of 6.65 GHz to 12.95 GHz, where the bandwidth of 64% is achieved for this structure compared to Perfect Electric Conductor (PEC). The pro- posed EBG structure is studied for different radiation angles and different polarization. 2019 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The RCS shows the detectability of an object by radar. A larger RCS means that an object is more easily detected. There have been two general ways of active cancellation and inactive cancellation to reduce the radar cross section, which includes using Radar Absor- bent Material (RAM) or changing targets geometry such as EBG structures [1] . The phase of the reflection coefficient in a typical EBG structure varies from 180 to 180 and resonates at the phase of 0 . In some previous works, the EBG structure is also known as an Artificial Magnetic Conductor (AMC) where the phase of reflection coefficient is between 90 and +90 . In this paper, two EBG structures are used to create a phase difference of 180 , called EBG1 and EBG2. We propose this structure to enhance the bandwidth of RCS reduction. The Salisbury proposed one of the first absorbents that was made by one lossy resistive dielectric sheet placed on quarter of wavelength above the perfect electric conductor. The main disad- vantages of this structure are high thickness and the frequency/ angle dependence [2] . To improve these disadvantages, the wide- band absorbers were proposed by using of a several resistive plates with k /4 space. However, the weight and volume of these absor- bers are more than a custom absorber. Another way of RCS reduc- tion in high frequency bands is changing the geometric shape of the target which causes the angle of incidence wave is different from the angle of radiation wave. The shaping method is an opti- mal way, but it affects the other radiation characteristics. To solve this problem, the high-impedance screens [3] the EBG and PEC in a

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: azadi@shahroodut.ac.ir (N. Azadi-Tinat), jghalibafan@shah- roodut.ac.ir (J. Ghalibafan).

1434-8411/ 2019 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

checkerboard structure [4] and the metamaterial absorber [5] are used. By using EBG and PEC in checkerboard structure, the differ- ence between the phases of the reflected waves from each element becomes 180 , and therefore due to wave’s cancellation, the RCS is reduced. However, this structure had a narrow bandwidth of about 5%. For higher bandwidth, the two EBGs put together on one checkerboard was proposed in [6] . The bandwidth of this structure was about 12%. As another example, in [7] about 40.2% bandwidth was achieved by using two different sizes of EBGs. In other work, a checkerboard configuration with two different EBG structures was proposed, where the bandwidth was about 26.7% [8] . The square and the hexagonal EBG checkerboard surfaces were used to increase the bandwidth of about 60% in [9] . In this paper, a new checkerboard EBG configuration that con- sists of two type square patch located on the FR4 substrate is pro- posed. The 64% bandwidth is achieved for this EBG structure. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the EBG cells and its equivalent circuit model. The analysis of RCS and for- mulations are given in Section 3. The simulation results for differ- ent incident wave and different angles are given in this section. Section 4 shows the fabricated structure and measured results.

2. The proposed EBG structure

Fig. 1 shows the proposed EBG structure. As shown in this fig- ure, the structure has two simple cells of EBG1 and EBG2. The EBG1 cell consists of a two type of square patches placed on the FR-4 substrate with a thickness of 3.2 mm and relative permittivity of 4.3. The EBG2 cell is patch less substrate named EMP (empty). It must be note that the overall dimensions of EBG1 and EBG2 are the same.

48

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 Fig. 1. The EBG structure

Fig. 1. The EBG structure (a) the unit cell of EBG1 (b) the unit cell of EBG2 (EMP).

Fig. 2 shows the equivalent circuit model of the unit cell of EBG1. As shown in this figure, the EBG1 is modeled by a capaci- tances network between metallic plates. The Capacitance C 1 is due to the effect of four-corner patches with the ground plane. Capacitance C 2 is the effect of the middle square with the ground plane, and capacitance C 3 is coupling capacitance between the middle square patch and the four square patches around it. Zl and Zline are transmission line impedances of corner patches and middle patch with ground plane, respectively. Z0 is free space

impedance. The capacitances can be calculated based on the fol- lowing equations [10,11]:

C

C

1 ¼ e eff a 2

h

2 ¼ e eff b 2

h

C 3 ¼ 4ae 0 e eff

Dcosh

2p H

a ¼

a

D

cosð hÞ

e eff ¼ e r þ 1

2

þ e r 1

2

1

q

ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

1 þ 12

h

D

H

G

¼ ln

sin

ps

2D

1

þ G

¼

h 0 :5ð 1 b 2 Þ 2 ð 1

b

2

4

Þð A

þ

þ A

2

Þ þ 4b A

þ

A

i

ð 1 b 2 Þþð 1 þ b 2 b 4 Þð A þ þ A Þ þ 2b 6 A þ A

4

4

8

ð

ð

1Þ

2Þ

ð 3Þ

ð 4Þ

ð 5Þ

ð

ð

6Þ

7Þ

8 ð ð 1 Þ 2 Þ ð 3 Þ ð 4 Þ ð 5 Þ

Fig. 2. The equivalent circuit model of the EBG1 unit cell.

Fig. 2. The equivalent circuit model of the EBG1 unit cell. Fig. 3. Reflection phase of

Fig. 3. Reflection phase of circuit model analysis and full-wave simulation.

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

49

A ¼

Table 1 The gemerical and electrical parameters of the EBG1 cell.

Parameters

Value

D

s

a

h

e r

Z 0

C1 0.0264 pF

C2 0.006 pF

C3 17.68 pF

15 mm

0.5 mm

7 mm

3.2 mm

4.3

377 X

1

q

ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

1 2D sinh ð

kcos h Þ 2

D

k

ð

8Þ

In these equation D , s , a , b , h , b , e r , k , and h are the width of each cell, the distance between the middle patch and the patches in the corners, width of the middle square patch, width of the corner square patches, the substrate thickness, the wave vector, the rela- tive permittivity of substrate, free space wavelength, and incident angle, respectively.

To validate the model of Fig. 2 , the reflection phase of EBG1 is calculated and compared with the full-wave simulated results obtained by CST software (see Fig. 3 ). The values of designed parameters are shown in Table 1 . The incident angle h is zero in this consideration. As shown in Fig. 3 , the results of circuit model analysis verify the full-wave simulation results.

3. Analysis of RCS reduction

Generally, the RCS reduction (RCSR) of a checkerboard surface that consists of two EBGs, can be estimated by [12] :

RCSR ¼ 10log

e jp 1 þ e jp 2

2

2

ð

9Þ

where p 1 and p 2 are the reflection phases of the two EBG cells. Fig. 4 Shows RCS reduction based on Eq. (9). As shown in this figure, when the difference phase of two EBGs is between 180 ± 37 , the RCS reduction is below 10 dB that is desired in this work. As mentioned in the past section, the proposed checkerboard structure consists of EBG1 and EBG2. Fig. 5 shows the reflection phases of the EBG1 and EBG2. The reflection phases of EBG1 and EBG2 passes through zero at frequency of 6 GHz and 11.3 GHz,

EBG2 passes through zero at frequency of 6 GHz and 11.3 GHz, Fig. 4. The calculated

Fig. 4. The calculated RCS reduction for a checkerboard surface.

4. The calculated RCS reduction for a checkerboard surface. Fig. 5. Simulated reflection phases of the

Fig. 5. Simulated reflection phases of the proposed EBG1 and EBG2.

50

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

respectively. The phase difference is also shown in this figure. The region with phase difference between 180 ± 37 is the desired fre- quency range where the RCS reduction is happened.

fre- quency range where the RCS reduction is happened. Fig. 6. The proposed finite checkerboard surface.

Fig. 6. The proposed finite checkerboard surface.

Fig. 6. The proposed finite checkerboard surface. Fig. 8. The simulated normal incident 3-D RCS pattern

Fig. 8. The simulated normal incident 3-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 at frequency of 7.5 GHz.

To consider the RCS reduction of the proposed structure, we use a finite checkerboard with 4 4 cells of EBG1 and 4 4 cells of EBG2, as shown in Fig. 6 . In the next, the pattern of normal incidence is simulated to real- ize RCSR bandwidth, and then the monostatic’s pattern in details including oblique wave incidence with TE and TM polarization is considered.

A. Normal incidence In this section, the RCSR of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 for normal incident wave (where h = 0 ) is considered. Fig. 7 (a) shows

wave (where h = 0 ) is considered. Fig. 7 (a) shows Fig. 7. The RCS

Fig. 7. The RCS reduction for the proposed EBG structure. (a) Calculated by equation of (9) , (b) Simulated by CST software.

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

51

al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 51 Fig. 9. The simulated normal
al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 51 Fig. 9. The simulated normal

Fig. 9. The simulated normal incident 2-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 and the same-size PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz.

Fig. 6 and the same-size PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz. Fig. 10. The simulated

Fig. 10. The simulated oblique incident 3-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TEz polarization.

the calculated RCS reduction based on equation of (9) , where the phase of p 1 and p 2 are the reflection phases of EBG1 and EBG2 given in Fig. 5 . In addition, Fig. 7 (b) shows the simulated RCS reduction for the structure in Fig. 6 . The both calculated and simulated results in Fig. 7 show the frequency bandwidth of more than 60% for RCS reduction.

The 3-D bistatic pattern of the RCS at frequency of 7.5 GHz is illustrated in Fig. 8 . As shown in this figure, we have four lobes at four angles u = 45 , 135 , 225 and 315 . The RCS pattern of the proposed structure in compare with same-size PEC plane is shown in Fig. 9 . Based on this figure, in planes of u = 0 and u = 90 , the maximum RCS of the proposed structure is 19.3 dB less than the maximum RCS for the PEC. In the diagonal plates of u = 45 and 135 the maximum RCS of the proposed structure is seen at angle of h = 26 that is 7.2 dB less than the maximum RCS for the PEC.

B. Oblique incidence In this section, we consider the oblique incident, where the plane of incident wave is matched to h = 30 and u = 90 . In this case, the two polarization TEz and TMz are investigated.

TEz polarization

The 3-D RCS pattern of TEz polarization is shown in Fig. 10 . As shown in this Figure, the four lobes are created in the opposite direction of the incidence wave. Fig. 11 shows 2-D monostatic RCS patterns at 7.5 GHz along the principal planes ( u = 0 , 90 ) and diagonal planes ( u = 45 , 135 ). As shown in Fig. 11 (a), in the planes of u = 0 and u = 90 , the

52

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 Fig. 11. The simulated oblique
et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 Fig. 11. The simulated oblique

Fig. 11. The simulated oblique incident 2-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 and the same-size PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TEz polarization.

PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TEz polarization. Fig. 12. The simulated oblique incident

Fig. 12. The simulated oblique incident 3-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TMz polarization.

maximum RCS of the proposed structure is 10 dB less than the maximum RCS of the PEC. However, in diagonal planes of u = 45 and u = 135 , the RCRS is decreased.

TMz polarization

Finally, the 3-D and 2-D RCS pattern of TMz polarizations are shown in Figs. 12 and 13 , respectively. As shown in this figures, the proposed structure shows similar behavior for TEz and TMz polarization. One of the drawbacks of the EBG structures is their dependence on the wave incidence angle. Fig. 14 shows the RCS reduction of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 for some different incident angles and compares with the same-size PEC plane. As the results of TEz and TMz are similar, the only TEz polarization results is peresented in Fig. 14 . Table 2 summarizes the frequency bandwidth of RCS reduc- tion for different incident angles. Based on the results given in Table 2 , the maximum bandwidth is more than 90% that is achieved at angle of 60 .

4. The fabricated structure and measured results

The proposed structure shown in Fig. 6 is fabricated and tested. Fig. 15 shows test setup where, at frequency of 7.5 GHz the wave is transmitted vertically to the structure. The measured pattern is shown in Fig. 16 .

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

53

al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 53 Fig. 13. The simulated oblique
al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55 53 Fig. 13. The simulated oblique

Fig. 13. The simulated oblique incident 2-D RCS pattern of the proposed structure in Fig. 6 and the same-size PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TMz polarization.

PEC plane at frequency of 7.5 GHz for TMz polarization. Fig. 14. The RCS reduction bandwidth

Fig. 14. The RCS reduction bandwidth of TEz polarization for different incident angles.

As shown in Fig. 16 , the simulated and measured RCS reduction is 9 dB and 11.5 dB, respectively. This difference between simu- lated and measured results is due to inaccuracy of the fabrication process and test setup.

As shown in Table 3 , compared to the previous works, the band- width of the proposed structure is increased to more than 60%. The proposed structure is low cost, easy for fabrication and FR4 is used which is easily available substrate.

54

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

Table 2 The RCS reduction bandwidth of TEz polariztion for different incident angles.

Incident angle

10 dB RCSR bandwidth

0

64%

10

0% (84% for RCSR < 5.7 dB) 24% (85% for RCSR < 5.7 dB)

20

30

70.7%

40

77.6%

50

89%

60

91.14%

5. Conclusion

This paper proposes a new checkerboard EBG structure for RCS reduction. Comparing to previous works, this structure is low cost, easy for fabrication and FR4 is used which is easily available sub- strate. The results show a wide frequency band of operation for the proposed structure. Furthermore, the polarization and incident angle have not severe destructive effect on its RCS behavior. So, this checkerboard EBG structure is a good candidate for designing a low-visibility radar targets.

good candidate for designing a low-visibility radar targets. Fig. 15. (a) The fabricated checkerboard EBG structure

Fig. 15. (a) The fabricated checkerboard EBG structure in Fig. 6 (b) The test setup.

checkerboard EBG structure in Fig. 6 (b) The test setup. Fig. 16. The simulated and measured

Fig. 16. The simulated and measured results of RCS pattern at frequency of 7.5 GHz.

Table 3 Comparison between results of proposed structure and similar studies.

 

Substrate

Substrate thickness

Unit cell dimension (mm 2 )

Wavelength of center frequency (mm)

Frequency range (GHz)

Mono-static RCSR

 

(mm)

Bandwidth (%)

[1]

RO4003

1.52

24 24 24 24 15 15 15 15 15 15

10

15.75–41.3

90

[7]

RO3010

1.27

19

13.5–17.9

40

[9]

RO5880

6.35

48

3.8–8.8

60

[11]

Plasma dielectric

6.35

30

7–13

60

This work

FR4

3.2

30

6.65–12.95

64

M. Gholipour et al. / Int. J. Electron. Commun. (AEÜ) 100 (2019) 47–55

55

References

US2599944A.