Satellite—Courtesy USC SERC, Image John Razzano,

background image—©graphic stock

For Satellites,
Think Small, Dream Big
A review of recent antenna developments for CubeSats.

A
dvances in modern technology have aided the development of a class of min-
iaturized satellites called SmallSats that typically weigh less than 500 kg. Key
members of this family are CubeSats. CubeSats can weigh as little as 1.33 kg,
Yahya Rahmat-Samii, with a typical volume of 10 × 10 × 10 cm3. Their potential has motivated the
Vignesh Manohar, scientific community to revisit existing spacecraft technologies to make them suitable
for CubeSats.
and Joshua M. Kovitz This work particularly focuses on CubeSat antenna development. An extensive
literature study is presented to survey the current state of the art in CubeSat antenna
systems. We summarize several recent CubeSat missions and describe antennas that
have been used in past CubeSat launches. We also discuss recent antenna research that
can enable many exciting missions in the future.

THE RISE OF CubeSats

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MAP.2017.2655582
Date of publication: 22 February 2017
For many years, smaller was not an option for the satellite industry. The strin-
gent radio-frequency (RF) requirements for high-performance satellites to
deliver the desired quality of service demands very heavy payloads. The typical
timeframe for such large, conventional satellites is more than five years from
proposal to launch, with a cost ranging from US$100 million to US$2 billion

22 1045-9243/17©2017IEEE April 2017 IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine

[1]. This is expected, considering that fixed and broadcast
satellite services operate at power levels near 10 kW, with
160
high-gain antennas and very precise satellite pointing.
While conventional satellite systems cannot be completely University
Military
replaced by smaller satellites, the vision and needs for
120 Civil Government
future space concepts are beginning to evolve. As small
Commercial
satellites become commonplace, many grand missions can

Mission Count
be envisioned at a fraction of previous costs, and space
80
becomes more accessible to the public.
The advent of digital signal processing technologies,
very large-scale integrated circuits, microelectromechani-
cal systems, and low-power programmable systems has 40
decreased the size of electronics and their power consump-
tion. As onboard electronics scales down to smaller dimen-
sions, it becomes practical to shrink satellite size by orders 0
2000 2005 2010 2015
of magnitude. As one might expect, a smaller volume and Year
weight lead to direct cost reductions in satellite launches.
There is a tradeoff between size and the multifunctional
capabilities that a satellite can offer, but this can be offset FIGURE 1. A chart showing the number of CubeSat missions
by launching a constellation of small satellites (SmallSats). (either already launched or with firm manifests) used for various
As we discuss later, SmallSats encompass many subclasses applications as a function of the year (adapted from [2]).
of small satellites, the most notable being the CubeSat. The
game-changing thought behind the CubeSat, which is the
focus of this article, is that designers could reduce satellite This work reviews the current literature and discusses
volume to the size of a secondary payload on conventional recent trends in CubeSat antenna system development. With
launch vehicles. This reduces launch costs considerably, potential CubeSat missions operating over a broad range of
thus providing universities, small commercial companies, frequencies, from ultrahigh frequencies (UHF) (400 MHz) up
government organizations, and even hobbyists a reasonable to 110 GHz (W band), antennas ranging from miniaturized
access to space. Figure 1 indicates that CubeSats have been patch antennas to large reflector antennas have been studied
gaining considerable popularity over the last five years. in the literature. Figure 2 illustrates the different antenna
Even more interesting is that other sectors, such as the types that have already been used for previous CubeSat mis-
military, commercial businesses, and government agencies, sions or are under current research. Table 1 categorizes this
are also excited about CubeSats. In fact, these sectors have article’s various references based on the diversified antenna
recently surpassed the research and launches conducted designs utilized for CubeSats.
by universities.
Antenna systems play a critical
role in remote sensing and establish-
Wire Antennas Reflector
ing a communication link between (Dipole/Monopole) Antennas
the CubeSat and Earth. The inherent
proportionality between the antenna
gain and antenna size compels design-
ers to compromise link quality for [3]
compliance with the size and weight [27]
Reflectarray
requirements of the CubeSat standard. Patch Antennas Antennas
Conforming to these requirements
and maintaining good performance Antenna Designs
represent a major RF and mechani- [55] for CubeSats
cal challenge. With CubeSats being [4]
considered for advanced low-Earth Membrane
orbit and deep-space missions, the Antennas
scientific community is actively work- Horn
ing toward the development of novel Antennas
antenna systems that can meet the [72] [36]
specifications for data rate and resolu-
tion while optimizing the physical size FIGURE 2. A graphical depiction of the various antenna types available to CubeSat
of the antenna system. designers.

IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine April 2017 23

 EXISTING STANDARDS FOR standard, the cube chassis should
SMALL SATELLITES be 10 × 10 × 10  cm3 and should
An illustration of the various clas- CubeSats strike a weigh no more than 1.33 kg. This
sifications within the SmallSat
family is shown in Figure 3. In
delightful balance CubeSat standard also designates
this v­ olume as 1U, representing
general, spacecraft are classified between mission one CubeSat unit volume.
based on their mass. While the
exact numbers regarding these clas-
lifetime and cost, CubeSats’ key contribution to
promote the widespread use of
sifications might differ between enabling a multitude miniaturized satellites is the estab-
organizations, the names MiniSat,
MicroSat, NanoSat, and PicoSat
of interesting lishment of a standard to which all
developers can adhere. The  stan-
have become fairly standard in measurements from dardization of size and weight also
the community. There is also no
agreement on whether the clas-
space. enabled the development of a uni-
versal launch system for CubeSats
sification should be based on called the Poly-Picosatellite Orbital
dry mass (the spacecraft weight without fuel) or wet mass. Deployer (P-POD). This meant that researchers throughout
Regardless, ­Figure  3 highlights the volume associated with the world could easily collaborate with each other to affordably
the different classifications. Most of the excitement in the participate in space missions through CubeSats. The P-POD
scientific community has focused on the NanoSat and Pico- launcher allows three 1U CubeSats to be launched simultane-
Sat sizes, which led to the development of the CubeSat. The ously. This potentially led to development of a 3U standard for
term Cube in CubeSat comes from an inspiration to develop advanced applications. The dimensions of a 3U CubeSat are
a simplified, standard chassis that would prompt growth in identical to those of three 1U CubeSats placed on top of each
commercial off-the-shelf components [5]. According to the other, resulting in a total volume of 3,000 cm3. Currently, stan-
dards such as 6U, 12U, and 27U have begun to be explored.
These new satellite standards are also shown in Figure 3, where
we assume a mass of 1.33 kg per 1U volume. Again, it should be
Table 1. A Categorized List of noted that the standard developed by California Polytechnic
References Based on Particular State University–San Luis Obispo refers to CubeSats as Pico-
CubeSat Antenna Designs.
Sats, though some organizations (such as NASA) classify Cube-
Antenna Type Reference (s) Sats within the NanoSat family [6]. This discrepancy is possibly
Wire antennas [10]–[24] due to the fact that the 1U CubeSat unit has a mass just slightly
greater than 1 kg [5], which falls right on the NanoSat–PicoSat
Reflector antennas [25]–[33]
boundary. Regardless of the slight inconsistencies in the nomen-
Reflectarray antennas [34]–[35] clature, CubeSats strike a delightful balance between mission
Membrane antennas [36] lifetime and cost, enabling a multitude of interesting measure-
Planar and patch antennas [37]–[69] ments from space to be carried out, as will be discussed.
It is worthwhile mentioning that the CubeSat standard
Horn antennas and [70]–[74]
guided wave structures is also a testimony to the advances made in the field of
mechanical engineering. It is the development of advanced
attitude control systems and launch
mechanisms that has made Cube-
Sats a viable option for space mis-
27U 12U 6U 3U 1U 0.5U sions. Such advanced stabilization
FastSat CubeSat
systems open doors for applications
CYGNSS-1
PhoneSat1.0 that require high antenna gain, since
KickSat pointing errors can significantly
degrade performance. Current state
of the art in spacecraft pointing accu-
racy is ±0.007° (1-sigma) for three-
axis pointing [6]. The Blue Canyon
Technologies XACT, for example,
500 kg
MiniSat
100 kg
MicroSat
10 kg
NanoSat
1 kg
PicoSat occupies 0.5U, weighs 0.85 kg, and
has been classified at a Technology
FIGURE 3. An illustration of the SmallSat family. Within this family, SmallSats can be Readiness Level (TRL) six (subsystem
classified by their mass as minisatellites, microsatellites, nanosatellites, and picosatellites model/prototype ­demonstrated in a
(adapted from [6]). CubeSats generally fall within the NanoSat and PicoSat classification. relevant environment).

24 April 2017 IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine

 0.25U CubeSat 1 0.1%
0.5U CubeSat 2 0.1%
1U CubeSat 258 15.8%
1.5U CubeSat 62 3.8%
2U CubeSat 120 7.4%
3U CubeSat 861 52.8%
3.5U CubeSat 1 0.1%
4U CubeSat 2 0.1%
5U CubeSat 1 0.1%
6U (1x6U) CubeSat 1 0.1%
6U CubeSat 126 7.7%
8U CubeSat 3 0.2%
12U CubeSat 24 1.5%
16U CubeSat 50 3.1%
Other Nanosats (1–10 kg) 67 4.1%
PocketQube 24 1.5%
TubeSat 6 0.4% Launched
Other Picosats (0.1–1 kg) 23 1.4% Not Launched

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Nanosatellites

FIGURE 4. A chart illustrating the number of CubeSats launched as a function of volume as of January 2016 (figure adapted
from www.nanosats.eu).

SOME EXCITING EXAMPLES OF CubeSat APPLICATIONS
The economic affordability of CubeSats has prompted mis-
sions such as GeneSat-1 that was a 5-kg CubeSat carrying
bacteria. GeneSat-1 was NASA’s first fully automated, self-
contained biological spaceflight experiment on a satellite of its
size. The aim of this mission was to study the effects of space
flights on the human body. GeneSat-1’s onboard microlabora-
tory included sensors and optical systems that could detect
proteins that are the products of specific genetic activity [7].
Similarly, CubeSats have been used for applications like space
tether testing, which would be too expensive to carry out
through conventional satellites. CubeSats also can be instru-
mental in increasing the TRL of various materials and elec-
tronics, since prototyping and flight testing through CubeSats
could be financially feasible.
Multiple CubeSat missions have been used in the area of
remote sensing due to the possibility of deploying a constel-
lation of CubeSats to monitor a particular phenomenon. The
Temporal Experiment for Storms and Tropical Systems (also
known as TEMPEST) CubeSat mission is projected to deploy
a constellation of five CubeSats spaced an equal distance in
orbit. This spacing is chosen to ensure that each CubeSat
passes over the same observation point at 5–10-min intervals,
enabling the observation of cloud behavior over short time
spans. This arrangement can thus monitor clouds at much
shorter intervals than is possible with conventional satellites,
which have repeat pass times of many hours to days [8]. The
concept of deploying a constellation of CubeSats can also
be used to observe short time phenomena such as lightning
bursts through correlations.
The potential of CubeSats has also been realized by the
commercial sector. Boeing’s Test Bed 1 validated advanced
attitude control systems for CubeSats using multiple inte-
grated sensors [9]. The AeroCube series developed by the
Aerospace Corporation is being used to develop advanced
flight capabilities for efficient propulsion and attitude stabili-
zation, as well as proof of concept for various scientific ideas.
Planet Labs Inc. is actively working toward deploying a fleet
of 150 individual CubeSats (called doves) for advanced earth
imaging. The website www.nanosats.eu documents over 1,600
nanosats launched since 1998. F ­ igure  4 shows an interest-
ing trend: the largest number of CubeSats that have been
launched have a volume of 3U, probably because the P-POD
launcher for CubeSats is naturally designed to accommodate
a 3U configuration. It also allows more physical space to carry
out advanced missions.
ANTENNAS FOR CubeSats
The previous section detailed the potential of CubeSats
for a variety of applications. One of the most important

IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine April 2017 25

 WIRE ANTENNAS
UHF Antenna S-Band Patch Wire antennas typically involve dipoles, monopoles, Yagi–
(Fixed) (× 2) Antenna (× 2)
Uda arrays, and helical antennas. These antennas typically
Double Electrons are placed on the external face of the CubeSat chassis,
Langmuir Probe Collector allowing space for other electronics. During flight, the wire
antennas are often stowed within the CubeSat volume and
Bus Solar deployed once in orbit. Wire antennas are especially com-
Cells PEC
mon for high frequency (HF), very HF (VHF), and UHF
applications, where the wavelength is long and achieving good
HVSA radiation efficiency within a small volume is challenging. The
Secret Ink
omnidirectionality of dipoles makes them viable candidates
Electron-Emitting for inter-CubeSat communications.
+X Film
Surfacing Mirror (Fixed) A considerable number of CubeSats that are currently in
+Y +Z
Charging Microthruster space use wire antennas for their simplicity. The HORYU-IV
Monitor
CubeSat is illustrated in Figure 5, providing an interesting
example of dipole antenna integration with a CubeSat [24]. The
FIGURE 5. The dipole and patch antennas mounted on the
HORYU-IV CubeSat [24]. authors of [10] used an array of four dipoles at the VHF band
for soil moisture sensing. Wire antennas have also been used for
axis stabilization of CubeSats in the following works:
■■ The HIT-SAT CubeSat used dipole arrays for communica-
tion and spin stabilization by measuring fluctuation in the
received power in the UHF/VHF band [11]. The CubeSat
with the dipoles mounted is illustrated in Figure 6.
■■ The feasibility of the mechanical arrangement of dipoles
themselves being used for aerodynamic stabilization was
explored in [12]. Applications of dipole and monopole
antennas for remote sensing and communications using
CubeSats are discussed in [13]–[17]. The researchers in
[18] and [19] investigated the potential of using composite
tape springs to fabricate dipoles and helical antennas for
improved f­ lexibility. A brief discussion of the development
of the quadrifilar helix antenna is presented in [20]. Stud-
ies comparing the performance of different wire antennas
are offered in [21]–[23].

FIGURE 6. The dipole antennas mounted on the HIT-SAT
CubeSat [11].
aspects of a satellite is the data communication system, of
which the antenna is an integral part. A variety of antenna
architectures have been investigated in the literature. This
section provides a comprehensive collection of various
works on the development of CubeSat antenna technol-
ogy. The list is by no means exhaustive, and readers are
encouraged to explore the cited references for further
reading (see Table 1).
REFLECTOR ANTENNAS
The development of high-gain reflector antennas for Cube-
Sats has recently attracted significant interest in the scientific
community. Reflectors offer the possibility of high gain and
fine resolution, but they come with increased mechanical
complexity. One of the first CubeSats to integrate a deploy-
able reflector system was the Aeneas mission [25]. Aeneas
featured an S-band umbrella reflector with a 0.5-m diam-
eter designed for operation at 2.4 GHz. Babuscia et al. [26]
developed and comprehensively tested an inflatable reflector
antenna at the S  band. The designed reflector is shown in
Figure 7. A symmetric Cassegrain system was conceptualized
in [27] and [28] for deep-space exploration and Earth science
missions, respectively, at the Ka band. An artist’s conception
of the launched CubeSat with the deployed antenna system
is shown in Figure 8. In many cases, the reflector deployment
utilizes a metallic mesh surface stretched between a discrete
number of parabolic ribs to enable stowage within the small
volume. Ka-band mesh surfaces for reflectors were revisited
in [29] for potential use in CubeSats. The effect of ribs and
their impact on reflector performance was studied in [30].

26 April 2017 IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine

FIGURE 7. An S-band inflatable reflector antenna developed
for a 3U CubeSat [26]. The stowed volume of this antenna FIGURE 8. A Cassegrain reflector antenna developed for a 6U
is under 0.6U. CubeSat for deep-space missions [27].

As an alternative to deployable mesh reflectors, solid-surface

deployable reflectors using elastic memory composites for
Ku and Ka bands were discussed in [31]. A spinning offset Panels Stow 56-W Solar
on Sides of Array
reflector system was conceptualized in [32] for radiometry
Bus
at 118.75  GHz. Reference [33] discusses the use of doubly
curved ­surfaces for improved scanning performance.
26-GHz
Reflectarray
REFLECTARRAYS Center
Ray
Panel
Reflectarrays can provide high gain while easily integrating Paths
3U Bus Feed
with the CubeSat structure. Since their structure consists of
flat panels, it is possible for them to be folded and stowed on Stowed Deployed
the CubeSat. They can also be integrated with the solar pan-
els of the CubeSat, as investigated in [34], which describes FIGURE 9. The ISARA, developed for a 3U CubeSat [34].
the development of the Integrated Solar Array Reflectarray
(ISARA) at Ka band. The structure for this reflectarray is
shown in Figure 9. Reference [35] describes the develop-
ment of a reflectarray for the Mars Cube One (MarCO),
which is the first CubeSat mission designed for Mars opera-
tion. The frequency of operation in this case was 8.425 GHz,
with a measured gain of 29.2 dB.

MEMBRANE ANTENNAS
Membrane antennas are a feasible option for classes of Cube-
Sat applications where the surface root-mean-square error
tolerance is reasonable. The basic idea is to implement the
antenna on a fabric-like material. This would allow the anten-
na to be easily folded and stowed in a compact volume. Ref-
erence [36] discusses the design of an S-band membrane
antenna that could provide a gain of 30.5 dB. The designed
antenna is shown in Figure 10. Note that the inflatable anten-
na in [26] could also be classified as a form of membrane
FIGURE 10. An S-band deployable membrane antenna
antenna. Possibly the most exciting aspect of membrane anten- developed for a 6U CubeSat [36]. The antenna occupies a 2U
nas is the low stowage-volume requirements; the stowage space inside the CubeSat.
volumes for the membrane antenna and inflatable antenna are
2U and less than 0.6U, respectively. profile and relative ease of fabrication. An example of patch
antennas seamlessly integrating in the CubeSat chassis is
PLANAR ANTENNAS in Figure 11. A variety of patch antenna designs have been
Planar antennas, such as patch and slot antennas, have investigated at the VHF, UHF, and S bands. Reference [37]
gained special attention for CubeSats, owing to their low surveys a variety of patch antenna designs for potential

IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine April 2017 27

 CubeSat missions. Meshed and transparent patch antennas
were investigated in [38]–[41]. An S-band patch antenna
array for inter-CubeSat communication was proposed in
[42]. Planar inverted-F antenna arrays for CubeSats at
the S band were proposed in [43] and [44]. Reference [45]
discusses the development of a slot array that could be pro-
grammed to be multibeam, omnidirectional, or directive. A
z z representative illustration of this slot array can be seen in
x y x y ­Figure 12. Other designs for patch and slot arrays for Cube-
(a) (b)
Sats can be found in [24] and [46]–[69].

FIGURE 11. The integration of patch antennas in a CubeSat
chassis: (a) folded and (b) deployed [55].
HORN ANTENNAS AND GUIDED WAVE STRUCTURES
Horn antennas can be a viable option for CubeSats at higher
frequencies. These antennas can provide good gain and
are amenable to fabrication and measurements, even at the
university levels. Reference [70] discusses the feasibility of
W-band CubeSat missions and proposes a horn antenna for
communications. A V-band bull’s-eye antenna was investi-
gated for inter-CubeSat communications in [71], and the
antenna is illustrated in Figure 13. Reference [72] discusses
the possibility of using multiple horn antennas to facilitate
high-speed satellite communications to and from Antarc-
tic bases. Horns are also widely used as a primary feed for
reflector and reflectarray antennas because of their low cross
polarization and low backlobes. Reference [28] has a brief
discussion on the horn antenna system used to illuminate a
Cassegrain reflector system at Ka band for deep-space and
Earth science missions. A potential horn design that could
be considered for future Ka-band ­CubeSat communication is
discussed in [73] and [74].

FIGURE 12. A miniaturized slot antenna for CubeSat

applications [45].
CONCLUSIONs
The satellite and space community has recently set its sights
on developing small yet powerful spacecraft as platforms
for many new missions to come. We have briefly discussed
the evolving standards and classifications of these so-called
SmallSats, with the most popular being the CubeSat. With
CubeSats showing potential for advanced applications, it is
important to develop antenna systems that can sustain wire-
less links or remote sensing requirements in a small, stowable
package. Depending on the frequency and gain requirements,
antennas ranging from small patches to large reflectors have
been proposed in the literature. The aim of this work has
been to provide the reader with a comprehensive review of
the state of the art and the various CubeSat antenna systems
that are under research. We look forward to many future
missions to come and hope to inspire others in continuing
research in this emerging area.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by a grant under contract with
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

AUTHOR INFORMATION
FIGURE 13. A V-band bull’s-eye antenna creating a large Yahya Rahmat-Samii (rahmat@ee.ucla.edu) is a distinguished
aperture from a narrow slit and corrugated surface [71]. professor and holder of the Northrop-Grumman Chair in

28 April 2017 IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine

­ lectromagnetics at the University of California–Los Angeles;
E [14] E. S. Moghaddam, N. Aboutorabian, S. Amiri, S. Nikmehr, and P. Rezaei,
a member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering; winner
of the 2011 IEEE Electromagnetics Field Award; and recipient
of the 2016 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society John Kraus
Antenna Award.
Vignesh Manohar (vignesh04@ucla.edu) is currently pur-
suing his Ph.D. degree under Prof. Yahya Rahmat-Samii at the
University of California–Los Angeles. His research interests
include the development of reflector and lens antennas for
space applications.
Joshua M. Kovitz (jmkovitz@ucla.edu) received his Ph.D.
degree in electrical engineering from the University of Califor-
nia–Los Angeles in 2015, where he is currently a p ­ ostdoctoral
scholar. His research focuses on open challenges within the
emerging areas of reconfigurable antennas, cognitive radios,
CubeSats, and millimeter-wave antennas.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Gao, K. Clark, M. Unwin, J. Zackrisson, W. A. Shiroma, J. M. Akagi,
K.  Maynard, P. Garner, L. Boccia, G. Amendola, G. Massa, C. Underwood,
M.  Brenchley, M. Pointer, and M. N. Sweeting, “Antennas for modern small
satellites,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 40–56, 2009.
[2] M. A. Swartwout. (2016, Aug. 31). CubeSat database. [Online]. Available:
https://sites.google.com/a/slu.edu/swartwout/home/cubesat-database
[3] Wikipedia. (2016, Dec. 28). F-1 (satellite). [Online]. Available: https://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-1_(satellite)
[4] State of the Art of Small Spacecraft Technology [Online]. Available: https://
sst-soa.arc.nasa.gov/03-power
[5] S. Lee, A. Hutputanasin, A. Toorian, W. Lan, R. Munakata, J. Carnahan,
D.  Pignatelli, and Arash Mehrparvar, “CubeSat design specification, rev. 13:
The  CubeSat program,” California Polytechnic State Univ., San Luis Obispo,
2014. [Online]. Available: http://cubesat.calpoly.edu/images/developers/cds_
rev13_final.pdf
[6] ARC Mission Design Division Staff, “Small spacecraft technology state of
the art,” NASA Ames Research Center, Moffet Field, CA, Tech. Rep. NASA/
TP–2014–216648/REV1, 2014.
[7] C. Kitts, J. Hines, E. Agasid, A. Ricco, B. Yost, K. Ronzano, and J. Puig-Suar,
“The GeneSat-1 microsatellite mission: A challenge in small satellite design,”
in Proc. 20th Annu. American Inst. Aeronautics and Astronautics/Utah State
­University Conf. Small Satellites, pp. 1–6, 2006.
[8] S. C. Reising, T. C. Gaier, C. D. Kummerow, V. Chandrasekar, S. T. Brown,
S. Padmanabhan, B. H. Lim, S. C. van den Heever, T. S. L’Ecuyer, C. S. Ruf,
Z. S. Haddad, Z. J. Luo, S. J. Munchak, G. Berg, T. C. Koch, and S. A. Bouk-
abara, “Overview of Temporal Experiment for Storms and Tropical Systems
(TEMPEST) CubeSat constellation mission,” in Proc. IEEE Microwave Theory
and Techniques Society Int. Microwave Symp. Digest, pp. 1–4, May 2015. doi:
10.1109/MWSYM.2015.7167136.
[9] M. Taraba, C. Rayburn, A. Tsuda, and C. MacGillivray, “Boeing’s CubeSat
TestBed 1 attitude determination design and on-orbit experience,” in Proc. 23rd
Annu. American Inst. Aeronautics and Astronautics/Utah State University Conf.
Small Satellites, pp. 1–9, 2009.
[10] M. Deshpande and J. Piepmeier. (2015). Design and development of
VHF antennas for space borne signal of opportunity receivers for CubeSat
platforms. [Online]. Available: http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa
.gov/20160000216.pdf
[11] T. Sato, R. Mitsuhashi, and S. Satori, “Attitude estimation of nano-satellite
‘HIT-SAT’ using received power fluctuation by radiation pattern,” in IEEE Int.
Symp. Antennas and Propagation, pp. 1–4, 2009.
[12] R. Lehmensiek, “Using the physical structure of a passive aerodynamic
attitude-stabilization system as a multi-frequency antenna on nano-satellites,”
IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 39–49, 2012.
[13] T. J. Mizuno, J. D. Roque, B. T. Murakami, L. K. Yoneshige, G. S. Shiroma,
R. Y. Miyamoto, and W. A. Shiroma, “Antennas for distributed nanosatellite
networks,” in Proc. IEEE/Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society Int.
Conf. Wireless Communications and Applied Computational Electromagnetics,
2005, pp. 606–609.
IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine April 2017
“Design and analysis of a dualband antenna for small LEO satellite applica-
tions,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Computational Electromagnetics and Its Applications,
2004, pp. 228–231.
[15] M. Nohmi, K. Oi, S. Takuma, and M. Ogawa, “Solar paddle antenna mount-
ed on pico-satellite ‘KUKAI’ for amateur radio communication,” in Proc. 2nd Int.
Conf. Advances in Satellite and Space Communications, 2010, pp. 31–36.
[16] A. T. Joseph, M. Deshpande, P. E. O’Neill, and L. Miles, “Development of
VHF (240–270 MHz) antennas for SoOp (Signal of Opportunity) receiver for
6U CubeSat platforms,” in Proc. Progress in Electromagnetic Research Symp.
(PIERS), 2016, pp. 2530–2531.
[17] C. E. Lesanu and A. Done, “Parasitic circular polarized vertical anten-
nas,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Development and Application Systems (DAS), 2016,
pp. 143–149.
[18] J. Costantine, Y. Tawk, A. Ernest, and C. Christodoulou, “Deployable
antennas for CubeSat and space communications,” in Proc. European Conf.
Antennas and Propagation, 2012, pp. 837–840.
[19] J. Costantine, Y. Tawk, I. Maqueda, M. Sakovsky, G. Olson, S. Pellegrino,
and C. G. Christodoulou, “UHF deployable helical antennas for CubeSats,”
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 3752–3759, 2016.
[20] P. Rezaei, “Design of quadrifilar helical antenna for use on small satellites,” in
Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation, 2004, vol. 3, pp. 2895–2898.
[21] P. Muri, O. Challa, and J. McNair, “Enhancing small satellite communica-
tion through effective antenna system design,” in Proc. Military Communica-
tions Conf. (MILCOM), 2010, pp. 347–352.
[22] G. Olson, S. Pellegrino, J. Costantine, and J. Banik, “Structural architec-
tures for a deployable wideband UHF antenna,” in Proc. Structural Dynamics
and Materials Conf., 2012, pp. 23–26.
[23] E. Pittella, S. Pisa, and A. Nascetti, “Design of an antenna system for Cube-
Sat satellites,” in Proc. 2nd Int. Academy Astronautics Conf. University Satellites
Missions and CubeSat Winter Workshop, 2013. Paper No. IAA-CU-13-13-05.
[24] M. T. Islam, M. Cho, M. Samsuzzaman, and S. Kibria, “Compact antenna
for small satellite applications,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 57, no. 2, pp.
30–36, 2015.
[25] M. Aherne, T. Barrett, L. Hoag, E. Teegarden, and R. Ramadas, “Aeneas-Colo-
ny I meets three-axis pointing,” in Proc. 25th Annu. American Inst. Aeronautics and
Astronautics/Utah State University Conf. Small Satellites, pp. 1–11, 2011.
[26] A. Babuscia, M. Van de Loo, Q. J. Wei, S. Pan, S. Mohan, and S. Seager,
“Inflatable antenna for CubeSat: Fabrication, deployment and results of experi-
mental tests,” in Proc. IEEE Aerospace Conf., 2014, pp. 1–12.
[27] N. Chahat, J. Sauder, M. Thomson, R. Hodges, and Y. Rahmat-Samii,
“CubeSat deployable Ka-band reflector antenna for deep space missions,” in
Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation and U.S. Nat. Committee/Int.
Union Radio Sci. Nat. Radio Science Meeting, 2015, pp. 2185–2186.
[28] N. Chahat, R. E. Hodges, J. Sauder, M. Thomson, E. Peral, and Y. Rahmat-
Samii, “CubeSat deployable Ka-band mesh reflector antenna development
for earth science missions,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 64, no. 6,
pp. 2083–2093, 2016.
[29] V. Manohar and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “Characterization of Ka-band mesh sur-
faces for CubeSat reflector antennas: From simple wire grid model to complex
knits,” in Proc. Int. Union Radio Sci. Nat. Radio Science Meeting, 2016, pp. 1–2.
[30] V. Manohar, J. M. Kovitz, and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “Ka band umbrella reflec-
tors for CubeSats: Revisiting optimal feed location and gain loss,” in Proc. Int.
Conf. Electromagnetics in Advanced Applications (ICEAA), 2016, pp. 800–803.
[31] R. Barrett, R. Taylor, P. Keller, D. Codell, and L. Adams, “Deployable
reflectors for small satellites,” in Proc. 21st Annu. American Inst. Aeronautics
and Astronautics/Utah State University Conf. Small Satellites, pp. 1–6, 2007.
[32] L. Periasamy and A. J. Gasiewski, “Prelaunch antenna calibration of Cube-
Sat MMW/SMMW radiometers with application to the PolarCube 3U tempera-
ture sounding radiometer mission,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Geoscience and Remote
Sensing Symp. (IGARSS), 2016, pp. 5565–5568.
[33] M. Takikawa, Y. Inasawa, and Y. Konishi, “One-dimensional beam scanning
reflector antenna for small satellite applications,” in Proc. IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Society Topical Conf. Antennas and Propagation in Wireless Com-
munications, 2012, pp. 159–162.
[34] R. E. Hodges, M. J. Radway, A. Toorian, D. J. Hoppe, B. Shah, and A. E.
Kalman, “ISARA-integrated solar array and reflectarray CubeSat deployable
Ka-band antenna,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation, 2015,
pp. 2141–2142.
29
 [35] R. E. Hodges, N. E. Chahat, D. J. Hoppe, and J. D. Vacchione, “The Mars
Cube One deployable high gain antenna,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas
and Propagation (APSURSI), 2016, pp. 1533–1534.
[36] P. A. Warren, J. W. Steinbeck, R. J. Minelli, and C. Mueller, “Large, deploy-
able S-band antenna for a 6U CubeSat,” in Proc. 29th Annu. American Inst.
Aeronautics and Astronautics/Utah State University Conf. Small Satellites,
pp. 1–7, 2015.
[37] F. E. Tubbal, R. Raad, and K. W. Chin, “A survey and study of planar anten-
nas for pico-satellites,” IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 2590–2612, 2015.
[38] R. Montaño, N. Neveu, S. Palacio, E. Martinez, D. R. Jackson, J. Chen,
P.  W. Fink, and R. S. Provence, “Development of low-profile antennas for
­CubeSats,” in Proc. 28th Annu. American Inst. Aeronautics and Astronautics/
Utah State University Conf. Small Satellites, pp. 1–5, 2014.
[39] T. Yasin and R. Baktur, “Circularly polarized meshed patch antenna for
small satellite application,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 12,
pp. 1057–1060, 2013.
[40] B. K. Montgomery, S. K. Podilchak and Y. M. M. Antar, “Circularly ­polarized
meshed patch antenna for CubeSats and other small satellites,” in Proc. IEEE Int.
Symp. Antennas and Propagation (APSURSI), 2016, pp. 1547–1548.
[41] X. Liu, J. Liu, D. R. Jackson, J. Chen, P. W. Fink, and G. Y. Lin, “Broadband
transparent circularly-polarized microstrip antennas for CubeSats,” in  Proc.
IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation (APSURSI), 2016, pp. 1545–1546.
[42] A. Budianu, A. Meijerink, M. J. Bentum, D. M. Smith, and A.J. Boonstra,
“Antenna architecture of a nano-satellite for radio astronomy,” in Proc. IEEE
Aerospace Conf., 2014, pp. 1–10.
[43] G. F. Kurnia, B. S. Nugroho, and A. D. Prasetyo, “Planar Inverted-F Anten-
na (PIFA) array with circular polarization for nano satellite application,” in Proc.
Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation (ISAP), 2014, pp. 431–432.
[44] G. Dassano and M. Orefice, “The PICPOT satellite antenna systems,” in
Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation, 2007, pp. 3029–3032.
[45] J. Padilla, G. Rosati, A. Ivanov, F. Bongard, S. Vaccaro, and J. Mosig,
“Multi-functional miniaturized slot antenna system for small satellites,” in Euro-
pean Conf. Antennas and Propagation, 2011, pp. 2170–2174.
[46] J. Klein, J. Hawkins, and D. Thorsen, “Improving CubeSat downlink capacity
with active phased array antennas,” in Proc. IEEE Aerospace Conf., 2014, pp. 1–8.
[47] S. Tariq and R. Baktur, “Circularly polarized UHF up-and-downlink anten-
nas integrated with CubeSat solar panels,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas
and Propagation, 2015, pp. 1424–1425.
[48] R. M. Rodriguez-Osorio and E. F. Ramirez, “A hands-on education project:
Antenna design for inter-CubeSat communications,” IEEE Antennas Propag.
Mag., vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 211–224, 2012.
[49] L. M. Hilliard, J. Mead, R. Rincon, and P. H. Hildebrand, “Lightweight
linear broadband antennas enabling small UAV wing systems and space flight
nanosat concept,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symp.,
2004, vol. 5, pp. 3577–3580.
[50] E. Palantei, S. Syarif, B. Topalaguna, and Z. Ubaid, “Four elements array of
lungs shape patch antenna for nanosatellite telemetry,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp.
Antennas and Propagation, 2013, pp. 1808–1809.
[51] O. Ceylan, Y. Kurt, F. A. Tunc, H. B. Yagci, and A. R. Aslan, “Low cost S
band communication system design for nano satellites,” in Proc. 5th Int. Conf.
Recent Advances in Space Technologies, 2011, pp. 767–770.
[52] W. N. Saputra, B. Prasetya, and Y. Wahyu, “Design and realization of two
array triangle patch of microstrip antenna with gold plat at frequency 2400–2450
MHz for hexagonal nanosatellite,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Information and Commu-
nication Technology, 2013, pp. 322–327.
[53] C. A. Bergsrud and S. Noghanian, “Microstrip aperture-coupled antenna
design for in-space power reception experiment using nano-sized satellite,” in
Proc. U.S. National Committee for the International Union for Radio Science
Meeting, 2015, pp. 25–25.
[54] J. Fouany, M. Thévenot, E. Arnaud, F. Torres, T. Monediere, N. Adnet, R.
Manrique, L. Duchesne, J. Baracco, and K. Elis, “Circularly polarized isoflux
compact X band antenna for nano-satellites applications,” in Proc. European
Radar Conf., 2015, pp. 381–384.
[55] M. P. Magalhaes, M. V. Heckler, J. Mota, A. S. Sombra, and E. C. Moreira,
“Design and analysis of microstrip antenna arrays for meteorological nano-satel-
lites for UHF uplink,” in Proc. Int. Telecommunications Symp., 2014, pp. 1–5.
30
[56] M. K. Watanabe, R. N. Pang, B. O. Takase, J. M. Akagi, G. S. Shiroma,
and W. A. Shiroma, “A 2-D phase-detecting/heterodyne-scanning retrodirec-
tive array,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn., vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 2856–2864,
2007.
[57] T. Sreeja, A. Arun, and J. Jaya Kumari, “An S-band micro-strip patch array
antenna for nano-satellite applications,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Green Technologies,
2012, pp. 325–328.
[58] E. Arnieri, L. Boccia, G. Amendola, and G. Di Massa, “A compact high
gain antenna for small satellite applications,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 277–282, 2007.
[59] B. T. Murakami, J. D. Roque, S. S. Sung, G. S. Shiroma, R. Y. Miya-
moto, and W. A. Shiroma, “A quadruple subharmonic phase-conjugating
array for secure picosatellite crosslinks,” in IEEE Microwave Theory and
Techniques Society Int. Microwave Symp. Digest, vol. 3, pp. 1687–1690,
June 2004.
[60] C. Hamrouni, A. Abraham, and A. Alimi, “Both sides linked antenna array
for ultra small satellite communication subsystem,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Innova-
tion Management and Technology Research, 2012, pp. 230–235.
[61] J. R. Saberin and C. Furse, “Challenges with optically transparent patch
antennas for small satellites,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propaga-
tion, 2010, pp. 1–4.
[62] J. Li, S. Gao, and J. Xu, “Circularly polarized high-gain printed antennas
for small satellite applications,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Microwave Technology and
Computational Electromagnetics, 2009, pp. 76–79.
[63] K. F. Warnick, “High efficiency phased array feed antennas for large radio
telescopes and small satellite communications terminals,” in Proc. European
Conf. Antennas and Propagation, 2013, pp. 448–449.
[64] F. E. Tubbal, R. Raad, K. W. Chin, and B. Butters, “S-band shorted patch
antenna for inter pico satellite communications,” in Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Tele-
communication Systems Services and Applications, 2014, pp. 1–4.
[65] P. R. Akbar, H. Saito, M. Zang, J. Hirokawa, and M. Ando, “X-band parallel-
plate slot array antenna for SAR sensor onboard 100 kg small satellite,” in Proc.
IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation, 2015, pp. 208–209.
[66] G. Codispoti, M. Lisi, and V. Santachiara, “X-band SAR active antenna
design for small satellite applications,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and
Propagation, 1995, vol. 1, pp. 666–669.
[67] S. Gunaseelan and M. Murugan, “High gain patch antenna for CubeSat,” in
Proc. Int. Conf. Wireless Communications, Signal Processing, and Networking
(WiSPNET), 2016, pp. 52–54.
[68] Y. Yao, S. Liao, J. Wang, K. Xue, E. A. Balfour, and Y. Luo, “A new patch
antenna designed for CubeSat: Dual feed, L/S dual-band stacked, and circu-
larly polarized,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 16–21, June
2016.
[69] E. Pittella, S. Pisa, M. Pontani, A. Nascetti, P. D’Atanasio, A. Zambotti, and
H. Hadi, “Reconfigurable S-band patch antenna system for CubeSat satellites,”
IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 6–13, May 2016.
[70] M. Lucente, T. Rossi, A. Jebril, M. Ruggieri, S. Pulitano, A. Iera, A. Molin-
aro, C. Sacchi, and L. Zuliani, “Experimental missions in W-band: A small LEO
satellite approach,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 90–103, 2008.
[71] C. J. Vourch and T. D. Drysdale, “Inter-CubeSat communication with
V-band ‘bull’s eye’ antenna,” in Proc. European Conf. Antennas and Propaga-
tion, 2014, pp. 3545–3549.
[72] J. A. King, J. Ness, G. Bonin, M. Brett, and D. Faber, “Nanosat Ka-band
communications: A paradigm shift in small satellite data throughput,” in Proc.
26th American Inst. Aeronautics and Astronautics/Utah State University Conf.
Small Satellites, pp. 1–21, 2012.
[73] J. M. Kovitz, V. Manohar, and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “A spline-profiled conical
horn antenna assembly optimized for deployable Ka-band offset reflector anten-
nas in CubeSats,” in IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas and Propagation, pp.  1535–
1536, July 2016.
[74] V. Manohar, J. M. Kovitz, and Y. Rahmat-Samii, “A novel customized
spline-profiled mm-wave horn antenna for emerging high performance Cube-
Sats,” in Proc. Antenna Measurements and Techniques Association (AMTA),
2016.

April 2017 IEEE Antennas & Propagation Magazine