www.ietdl.

org
Published in IET Microwaves, Antennas & Propagation Received on 10th September 2009 Revised on 7th November 2010 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

ISSN 1751-8725

Spiral array architecture, design, synthesis and application

A. Jafargholi M. Kamyab M. Veysi
Electronic Engineering Department, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, PO Box 16315-1355, Tehran, Iran E-mail: jafargholi@ee.kntu.ac.ir

Abstract: This study introduces a new array architecture, in which antenna elements are arranged in a spiral curve. The spiral array enhances ultra-wideband (UWB) pattern characteristics compared to alternative array geometries of similar elements, without requiring a complex feed network for frequency change compensation. A number of examples are illustrated to demonstrate the array capability in UWB array designs. It is revealed that for the same number of elements and curvature lengths, a spiral array has a wider radiation bandwidth than the corresponding linear and circular arrays. In addition, it is also demonstrated that the spiral architecture discussed here can be best suited for small antenna array applications. The array factor and the bandwidth of the spiral array are calculated theoretically. The simulation results are found to be in good agreement with the theoretical calculations.

Introduction

Array elements, feed networks and array architecture are three main factors determining the array performance [1]. In the past several decades, the ultra-wideband (UWB) antenna elements have been developed with input impedance that remains relatively constant within a reasonably wide frequency range [28]. As an important parameter in the array design, the feed network generally depends on the array elements and architecture. The selection of the array architecture for the realisation of a desired array antenna is determined by requirements on the array bandwidth, pattern, size and scan range [1]. In addition, broad radiation and input impedance bandwidths are two major characteristics of the antenna arrays for UWB applications. Since the input impedance bandwidth depends on the characteristics of the element used in the array, the radiation bandwidth is the limiting factor. In other words, the radiation bandwidth of the array limits its practical bandwidth. Since antenna arrays play a signicant role both in direction nding and in increasing the capacity of the systems, the use of suitable array architecture is becoming increasingly important. From an architecture point of view, there are still many theoretical as well as practical open issues despite the basic congurations found in the literature [1]. The broadband frequency characteristics can be obtained based on the fundamental theory introduced by Rumsey in the fall of 1954 [9]. As a result, we speculate that the spiral array architecture, in which antenna elements are arranged in a spiral curve, may be frequency independent. The simulation results conrmed this claim is provided later. Consequently, this paper is mainly focused on the radiation bandwidth enhancement and on the basic design principle for the spiral array architecture. The proposed spiral architecture exhibits great potential for applications such as radio direction
IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

nding and UWB systems. The combination of similar UWB antenna elements to form a spiral array is an interesting way of improving the directional properties of the UWB antennas without altering their size. Furthermore, the proposed array offers more degrees of freedom than conventional arrays, namely, circular and linear arrays. In UWB systems, one is interested in having an antenna or antenna array which maintains a substantially stable radiation pattern over the entire frequency range of interest to keep UWB pulse distortion as small as possible. However, the bandwidth of conventional arrays (linear and circular arrays) is limited because the radiation pattern scans with frequency and thus moves off the target. In order to avoid this beam squint problem, wide band arrays are required. A number of examples are presented to demonstrate the capability of the spiral array in UWB array antenna designs, all of which are designed based on array architecture rather than elements or feed network. However, the total radiation pattern of the antenna array is equal to the product of the active element and array radiation vectors, referred to as pattern multiplication. Therefore deployed UWB antenna elements should also have a relatively stable radiation pattern over the frequency range of interest. To this aim, a miniaturised UWB monopole antenna with stable radiation pattern is proposed, which is simple to manufacture and is well suited to being incorporated into a spiral array. The simulation was performed with CST MICROWAVE STUDIO based on the nite integration method.

Array characterisation

A three-dimensional array with an arbitrary geometry is shown in Fig. 1. For obvious reasons, the coordinate system of choice is spherical where the location of the mth element is characterised by rm = (rm , um , fm ). The unit vector
503

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org
rate of the spiral radius proportionate to angle fm , and x and y are the unit vectors along the x- and y-axis, respectively. Two possible types of spiral array architectures are depicted in Fig. 2. The parameters of the spiral array are labelled in Fig. 2 where r0 is the distance of the rst element from the origin and fm (m 2 1)p/b denotes the angle of the mth element relative to the x-axis. It is indispensable to point out that b (b . 0) is one of the important parameters of the spiral array, which identies locations of the array elements. It also increases the available degrees of freedom in the optimisation of the array performance. Substituting (3) into (1) reduces it to

Fig. 1 Schematic of an arbitrary three-dimensional array

pointing from the incident wave source to the origin can therefore be represented as k = (1, u, w). Throughout this contribution, the incident wave source is assumed to be located at the far eld. In order to calculate the array factor, it is necessary to nd the phase angle of the received plane wave from the source at each of the elements with respect to the origin given by

jm =

2p r eafm sin u cos(w fm ) l 0

(4)

And thus the resultant array factor can be expressed by

M

AF(u, f) =
m=1

Im ej((2p/l)r0 e

afm

sin u cos(wfm )+dm )

(5)

jm = bkrm
= b[xm sin(u) cos(w) + ym sin(u) sin(w) + zm cos(u)] (1) Here, element locations are designated as (xm , ym , zm , 1 m M) and M is the number of array elements. And thus the array factor is calculated from
M

The spiral array bandwidth can be also calculated using the perturbation theory [Appendix]. In order to gain further insight into the spiral array bandwidth, (6) introduces a spiral-to-linear bandwidth ratio (SLBWR) SLBWR = (1/2)M (M + 1)(eap/b 1) [e(ap/b)M 1] for r0 = dLinear (6) where dLinear is the element separation for the linear array. For the contracting spiral array whose radius decreases as w increases (i.e. a , 0), SLBWR for the large value of M (M b) can be expressed by 1 SLBWR|M 1 M 2 (1 eap/b ) 2 (7)

AF(u, w) =
m=1

Im ej(jm +dm )

(2)

In the above equation, Im and dm denote the magnitude and phase of the weighting of the mth element, respectively. For the spiral topology, the position vector of the mth element can be expressed by rm = r eafm = r0 eafm cos(fm ) x + r0 eafm sin(fm ) y (3)

Here, a is the spiral constant, which species the increasing

The effects of the spiral array parameters, namely, number of

Fig. 2 Two possible array architectures, where the element locations are specied by (3)
a Contracting spiral, a 20.125, M 5, b 1.75, f0 5 GHz, r0 0.04 m b Expanding spiral, a 0.1, M 7, b 3, f0 7 GHz, r0 0.01 m 504 IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org
array elements M, spiral constant a and b on the array bandwidth are investigated in order to obtain some engineering guidelines for spiral array designs. The SLBWRs of ve- and sevenelements spiral arrays for different values of b are shown in Fig. 3. As can be seen, the SLBWR decreases as the spiral constant (a) increases. It can also be noticed that the curves of the contracting spiral (a , 0) have steeper slopes as compared to those of the expanding spiral (a . 0). In contrast to the contracting spiral, the SLBWR of the expanding spiral increases with the value of b. Fig. 4 shows the SLBWR of the contracting and expanding spirals with the number of elements as a parameter. As can be seen, increasing the number of array elements increases the SLBWR in both cases (a 20.125 and 0.1). Based on the uniform amplitude and progressive phase excitation method, for the main lobe pointing to (u0 , f0), the phase dm of the radiating elements can be expressed by [1, 10] By using (3) and (8), the element locations and excitations can be easily determined so that the main lobe points to (u0 , f0) (90, 0). To demonstrate the capability of the spiral array to generate the UWB radiation, two examples are studied here. The rst one is a ve-element contracting spiral array whose parameters are labelled in Fig. 2a. A seven-element expanding spiral array, whose parameters are labelled in Fig. 2b, is also studied here. The excitation currents and locations of the elements, of both cases, are listed in Table 1. The simple monopole antennas are used as array elements. The simulated radiation patterns of the previously mentioned spiral arrays are shown in Figs. 5 and 6 and compared to the analytical results. It should be pointed out that the isolated element pattern is considered in the analytic calculations. As can be seen, the agreement between the simulation and analytical results is reasonable. Small difference between the simulation and analytical results is attributed to the existence of the mutual coupling between the array elements, which is not considered in the analytic calculations. In the simulations, the mutual coupling between the array elements plays an

dm =

2p r eafm sin u0 cos(f0 fm ) l 0

(8)

Fig. 3 SLBWR against spiral constant a, with the value of b as a parameter

a M5 b M7

Fig. 4 SLBWR against number of array elements M, with the value of b as a parameter
a a 0.1 b a 20.125 IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301 505

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org
Table 1
Elem. no. design I Excitation currents and locations of array elements 1 2 3 4 5 (1.27, 1.59) 0.236 0.9716i (21.369,0) 20.4227 + 0.906i 6 (1.016, 21.27) 0.485 0.8745i 7 (1.874, 0)

location (4.00, 0) (20.71, 3.12) (22.30, 21.18) (x, y) (cm) current 20.50 + 0.866i 0.735 + 0.677i 20.7436 + 0.668i (complex) (0.55, 0.961) 0.6860.727i (20.616, 1.067) 0.618 + 0.785i

design II location (1.00, 0) (x, y) (cm) current 0.1040.994i (complex)

(20.760, 21.316) (0.844, 21.462) 0.44 + 0.8976i

0.3272 0.9449i 20.92353834i

Fig. 5 Normalised radiation pattern of the contracting spiral array antenna (design I), at u 908
a 4 GHz b 5 GHz c 6 GHz

Fig. 6 Normalised radiation pattern of the expanding spiral array antenna (design II), at u 908:
a 4 GHz b 5 GHz c 6 GHz

important role in determining of the array characteristics. Here, since the element separation is small, the mutual coupling effect is considerable. The obvious difference between the analytical and simulation results at low frequencies is due to the fact that the element separation is relatively smaller in terms of wavelength at the lower frequency. For the expanding spiral array (design II), since the element separation is smaller than that of the contracting spiral (design I), this difference is clearer (see Fig. 6a). As a result, the use of active element pattern could bring the analytical and simulation results into better agreement. On
506 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

the other hand, the front-to-back ratios of these array designs are relatively low. To eradicate this problem, the genetic algorithm (GA) is applied to the array design to improve the antenna efciency. The improved radiation patterns of the expanding spiral array (design II) at different frequencies are also shown in Fig. 6. The effect of GA on the contracting spiral array (design I) has been investigated latter when we are trying to practically realise the spiral array antenna. The excitation currents of the antenna elements obtained from GA are also listed in Table 2. Fig. 7 shows the frequency response of the antenna
IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

www.ietdl.org
Table 2
Elem. no. current (complex) design I current (complex) design II Excitation currents of array elements obtained from genetic algorithm 1 20.012 + 0.0206i 20.0274 + 0.261i 2 20.07 0.0646i 20.1224 + 0.1296i 3 0.112 0.1005i 0.2136 + 0.2713i 4 20.071 + 0.29443i 0.0453 0.09716i 5 20.0575 + 0.1037i 0.1322 + 0.2693i 6 20.05317 + 0.1535i 7 20.1394 0.0541i

Fig. 7 Frequency response of the simulated directivity in the main lobe direction, for the spiral array

Fig. 8 Geometries of the spiral, circular and linear arrays: dlinear 4.7 cm and r0,circular 3.04 cm

directivity in the main beam direction, (u0 , f0) (90,0), in both cases. The 3 dB directivity bandwidth of the contracting and expanding spiral arrays are 5:1 (ranging from 1.5 to 7.5 GHz) and 4.375:1 (ranging from 2.4 to 10.5 GHz), respectively. It is worthwhile to point out here that the expanding spiral array (design II) has more stable and better characteristics than the contracting spiral array (design I). However, since the space between the antennas in the expanding spiral array described in Fig. 2b is very small, its practical realisation is very difcult to achieve. Consequently, the contracting spiral array described in Fig. 2a is selected for practical realisation.

to satisfy (10). r0,Circular = CS dLinear = CS 1 2p 1 (M 1)

(10)

3 Comparison of spiral, circular and linear array architectures

Various array architectures have been proposed and investigated in the literature [1, 1014]. Besides the spiral array architecture proposed in this paper, the linear and circular array architectures are popularly used in antenna engineering. Fig. 8 compares the geometries of the spiral, linear and circular arrays. To make a fair comparison, the number of elements and curvature lengths are the same in all cases. The total length of an M-element linear array with an element separation of dLinear is L (M 2 1)dLinear whereas the circumference of an M-element circular array with a radius of r0,circular is Cc 2pr0,Circular . In addition, for an M-element spiral array, the array circumference can be expressed by r0 1 + a2 afM (e CS = 1) a (9)

To have a fair comparison, the element separation for linear array and the radius of the circular array are selected
IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

The parameters of the spiral array are the same as those given in the caption of Fig. 2a whereas the parameters of the circular and linear arrays are labelled in Fig. 8. For all array geometries, simple monopole antennas are used as array elements. Directivities of the arrays with different geometries in the main beam direction are plotted in Fig. 9a. As revealed in the gure, the spiral array architecture provides a wider radiation bandwidth. The 3 dB radiation bandwidth of the spiral array architecture is approximately 4.1 and 1.9 times wider than that of the linear and circular arrays, respectively. Further insight is sought through the investigation of the front-to-back ratio of circular and spiral arrays, as shown in Fig. 9b. As revealed in the gure, the spiral array provides larger FBR over the entire frequency band of interest compared to the circular array. The cross-polarisation level (with respect to the 0 dB co-polarisation level) comparison of the arrays with different geometries is shown in Fig. 9c. The fact that the circular array is a symmetrical arrangement causes the radiation pattern to experience lower cross-polarisation levels as compared to the spiral and linear arrays. However, the cross- polarisation level of the spiral array geometry is signicantly lower than that of the linear array because of its more symmetrical conguration. Finally, it should be noted that the spiral arrangement allows the beam to be steered in any direction in the azimuth plane, similar to the linear and circular arrangements [1].
507

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 9 Comparison between different array geometries (without GA):

a Directivity [in the main lobe (u 908, w 08) direction] b FBR c Cross-polarisation level

Practical realisation of the spiral arrays

Since the main concept outlined in this paper is focused on the radiation patterns and on the basic design principles for the spiral array, the input impedance characteristics which depend on the characteristics of the UWB-elements used in the array were not fully considered in the previous sections, similar to the procedure used by other authors [1]. Consequently, a simple monopole antenna was used in the basic description of the spiral arrays. However, in practice, the mutual coupling between the array elements plays an important role in determining the array characteristics. In the spiral array antennas, since the element spacing sometimes becomes small, the UWB antenna elements need to be small enough so that they can be arranged in a spiral curve with minimum mutual coupling. In addition, it is expected that spiral array gain will be degraded by rotation of the element radiation pattern within the antenna impedance bandwidth. To eradicate these problems, a miniaturised UWB antenna element with stable radiation pattern within the impedance bandwidth is proposed in this section. To this aim, a square planar metal-plate monopole antenna is selected to provide wideband frequency characteristics. The main reason is that the radiation patterns of the square planar metal-plate monopole antennas are usually
508 & The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

less degraded within the antenna impedance bandwidth. The idea comes from the fact that location and number of feeding strips signicantly affect the current distribution on the planar

Fig. 10 Omnidirectional UWB antenna: W 10.5 mm, W1 7.4 mm, L 1 mm, H 20 mm, SL 6.2 mm, G1 0.2 mm, G2 0.1 mm, G3 0.8 mm and WG 20 mm
IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 11 CST simulated results of the proposed planar monopole antenna

a VSWR b Directivity of UWB antenna element

monopole antennas which in turn affect the antenna impedance bandwidth [15]. The geometry of the proposed planar monopole antenna is shown in Fig. 10. The antenna is fed through the ground plane by a coaxial cable. In the feeding point, the feeding strip is divided into two parts, as shown in Fig. 10. The antenna parameters are also labelled in Fig. 10. Fig. 11a shows the voltage standing wave ratio (VSWR) of the proposed miniaturised UWB monopole antenna. As can be seen, the antenna VSWR is acceptably small (VSWR 3) in

Fig. 12 Simulated model of the contracting spiral array

the frequency range from 2.8 to 8.5 GHz. The frequency response of the antenna directivity is also plotted in Fig. 11b. To investigate the practical realisation of the spiral array architecture, the proposed miniaturised UWB antenna elements are arranged in a spiral curve (design I). The geometry of the resultant spiral array is shown in Fig. 12. The excitation currents of the antenna elements can also be found in Table 2. The VSWRs of the array elements are shown in Fig. 13a. As can be seen, all the array elements have a VSWR lower than 2.5 in the frequency range from 2.5 to 7.5 GHz. Fig. 13b shows the mutual coupling between the array elements. As can be seen, the mutual couplings between the array elements are acceptable over the entire frequency band of interest (always below 29 dB). The CST-simulated radiation patterns of the proposed spiral array at different frequencies are shown in Fig. 14. The main lobe of the spiral array composed of proposed UWB monopole antennas and backed by an innite ground plane always points to the u 908 direction, the same as a vertical monopole backed by an innite ground plane. But the beam direction begins to move towards a high-elevation angle as the ground plane size reduces and thus the main beam

Fig. 13 CST simulated results of the proposed spiral array shown in Fig. 12
a VSWR of the array elements b Mutual couplings between the array elements IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301 509

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org

Fig. 14 Radiation patterns of the spiral array antenna shown in Fig. 13, at w 0 plane, for different frequencies

an innite ground plane [in the main beam direction (u 908)] is also plotted for comparison.

Conclusion

Fig. 15 Frequency response of the directivity, in the u 358 direction, for the proposed spiral array shown in Fig. 12
As a reference, the directivity of the same spiral array composed of ideal monopole antennas backed by an innite ground plane, in the u 908 direction, is also depicted in this gure

In this paper, a novel planar array for UWB applications has been introduced and thoroughly investigated. A fair comparison between the spiral array architecture and its conventional counterparts, namely, circular and linear array architectures, exhibits the ability of the proposed architecture to enhance the radiation bandwidth of an array. Several spiral array antennas have been designed and simulated to conrm the theoretical calculations. However, the UWB spiral arrays generally require a miniaturised UWB antenna with stable radiation pattern. To eradicate this problem, a novel miniaturised UWB monopole antenna with stable radiation pattern within the antenna impedance bandwidth has been proposed. It was revealed that the proposed antenna is a good candidate for spiral array antennas so that the mutual couplings between the array elements are not that signicant.

References

direction depends on the ground plane size. In the case at hand, the ground plane size is 20 cm 20 cm. As frequency increases and wavelength decreases, the ground plane size increases as compared to the wavelength and thus the beam direction moves towards a low-elevation angle, as revealed in Fig. 14. The frequency response of the directivity (in the beam direction (u 358)) of the proposed spiral array shown in Fig. 12 is plotted in Fig. 15. The directivity of the same spiral array composed of ideal monopole antennas backed by
510

1 Allen, B., Dohler, M., Okon, E.E., Malik, W.Q., Brown, A.K., Edwards, D.J.: Ultra-wideband antennas and propagation for communications, radar and imaging (John Wiley, New York, 2007) 2 Li, P., Liang, J., Chen, X.: Study of printed elliptical/circular slot antennas for ultra wideband applications, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2006, 54, (6) 3 Ammann, M.J., Chen, Z.N.: A wide-band shorted planar monopole with bevel, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2003, 51, (4), pp. 901 903 4 Agrawall, N.P., Kumar, G., Ray, K.P.: Wide-band planar monopole antennas, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 1998, 462, pp. 294 295 5 Liang, J., Chiau, C., Chen, X., Parini, C.G.: Printed circular disc monopole antenna for ultra wideband applications, IEE Electron. Lett., 2004, 40, (20), pp. 1246 1248 IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011

www.ietdl.org
6 Wu, X.H., Chen, Z.N.: Comparison of planar dipoles in UWB applications, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2005, 53, pp. 1973 1983 7 Eldek, A.A.: Ultrawideband double rhombus antenna with stable radiation patterns for phased array applications, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2007, 55, (1), pp. 8491 8 Wang, F.J., Zhang, J.-S.: Wideband printed dipole antenna for multiple wireless services, J. Electromagn. Waves Appl., 2007, 21, (11), pp. 1469 1477 9 Dyson, J.D.: The equiangular spiral antenna, IRE Trans. Antennas Propag., 1959, 7, (2), pp. 181187 10 Balanis, C.A.: Antenna theory (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1997) 11 Kraus, J.D.: Antennas (McGraw-Hill, 1988) 12 Ng, B.P., Er, M.H., Kot, C.: Linear array geometry synthesis with minimum sidelobe level and null control, IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 1994, 141, (3), pp. 162 166 13 Khdier, M.M., Christodoulou, C.G.: Linear array geometry synthesis with minimum side lobe level and null control using particle swarm optimization, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2005, 53, (8), pp. 26742679 14 Mahmoud, K.R., El-Adawy, M., Ibrahem, S.M.M.: A comparison between circular and hexagonal array geometries for smart antenna systems using particle swarm optimization algorithm, Progress Electromagn. Res., 2007, PIER 72, pp. 7590 15 Wong, K.L., Wu, C.H., Su, S.W.: Ultrawide-Band square planar metalplate monopole antenna with a trident-shaped feeding strip, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., 2005, 53, (4), pp. 1262 1269

In the above equation, higher-order basis functions are neglected for simplicity. And thus
M M 2pdspir |f f0 | |Im eafm | (16) f0 m=1

|AF(f0 , f )|
m=1

|Im | +

For uniform feed distribution, Im I0 , some manipulation gives

M 2pdspir |f f0 | |eafm | Mf0 m=1

|AF(f0 , f )| 1 +

(17)

Assume that the normalised main beam is dened by |AF(f0 , f )| 1 1, where 1 is a small positive value. Thus
M 2pdspir |f f0 | eafm Mf0 m=1

Appendix

1 1|1

|AF(f0 , f )| 1 +

7.1 Bandwidth calculation of the spiral array antenna To reduce the equations complexity, the rst-element location is expressed in terms of the array centre frequency ( f0) so that r0 = dspir l0 = dspir c f0 (11) And thus one can easily write |f0 f | j f0 2p dspir

(18)

e
m=1

afm

(19)

where dspir is a constant and l0 is the free space wavelength at f0 . And thus r0 c c r f = dspir / 0 = dspir l l f0 f f0 (12)

where j is a small positive value. Finally, the fractional bandwidth of the spiral array can be expressed as 2|f0 f | j f0 pdspir
M 1

Substituting (r0/l ) into (5), the array factor can be reorganised in terms of frequency ( f ) and angle (w) as
M

BWfract.Spiral =

eafm
m=1

(20)

AF(w, f ) =
m=1

Im ej(2pdspir (f /f0 ) e

afm

sin u cos (wfm )+dm )

(13)

By applying the above method to the uniform linear array (ULA), we have 2|f0 f | j f0 pdlin
M 1

And thus, for w f0 , one can write

M

AF(f0 , f ) =
m=1

Im e

j(2pdspir (f /f0 ) eafm sin u cos (f0 fm )+dm )

BWfract.ULA = (14)

m
m=1

(21)

Considering the fact that the array factor around the main lobe is a smooth function, the Taylor expansion of (14), about the point f f0 results in
M

where dlin dlinear/l0 and dLinear is the element separation. After some manipulations, a spiral-to-linear bandwidth ratio (SLBWR) can be dened as below SLBWR = = SLBWR = (1/2)M (M + 1) [e(ap/b)M 1]/(eap/b 1) (1/2)M (M + 1)(eap/b 1) , [e(ap/b)M 1] Cs M (M + 1) (eap/b 1) , 2r0 (M 1) [e(ap/b)M 1] for the same array lengths (22) for r0 = dLinear

AF(f0 , f ) =
m=1

Im ej(2pdspir e

afm

sin u cos (f0 fm )+dm )

M 2pdspir +j (f f0 ) sin u Im eafm cos (f0 fm ) f0 m=1

j(2pdspir eafm sin u cos (f0 fm )+dm )

(15)

IET Microw. Antennas Propag., 2011, Vol. 5, Iss. 5, pp. 503 511 doi: 10.1049/iet-map.2010.0301

511

& The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2011