Dispersion and UWB Antennas
Hans GregoIy Schantz
Next-RF, Inc.
Huntsville, AL,USA
e-mail: h.schantz@ieee.org
Ahstract-
This paper discusses the phenomenon of dispersion in
U W B antennas and presents a simple madel to evaluate
the lime domain radiated fields from an antenna structure.
This model allows a quick assessmentof dispersion.
I. INTRODUCnON
Traditionally, engineers have evaluated antennas
according to a few basic parameters such as gain and
retum loss (or matching). For typical narrowband
antennas, these parameters vary little across the
operational band. Thus, one is justified in treating these
parameters as constants.
The extension to ultra-wideband antennas seems
straightforward. Since gain and return loss generally
vary with frequency, these parameters may he treated as
functions of frequency.
This approach does not tell the whole story, however.
Gain is a scalar quantity, and thus does not reveal
subtleties in phase variation that may have a serious
impact on UWB antenna performance. For instance
even though an antenna’s gain may appear well
behaved, if the phase center of an antenna moves as a
function of frequency, or as a function of look angle,
then an antenna will radiate a mangled and dispersed
waveform.
Dispersion is a problem for multi-band systems as well
as those where a radiated signal occupies the entire
band, If an antenna behaves differently at different look
angles or at different frequencies, then a UWB system
must compensate for these differences. This
compensation may be difficult and resource intensive.
Further, there is no guarantee that the performance of a
dispersive antenna may be made equivalent to that of a
non-dispersive antenna.
The best way to obtain a quick qualitative assessment of
dispersion is to look at the time domain electromagnetic
field signals emitted by an antenna. This paper will
examine dispersion in typical frequency independent
antennas as well in compact UWB antenna elements.
This paper will suggest a simple analytical model for
0-7803-8373-7/04/$20.00 02004 IEEE - 161 -
predicting qualitatively the behavior of a UWB antenna
element. Finally this paper will analyze a planar loop
UWB antenna and assess its dispersion. The aim of this
paper is to demonstrate that a qualitative dispersion
assessment of a proposed antenna element is simple and
straightforward.
2. DISPERSION OF TRADITIONAL
FREQUENCY INDEPEiWEW ANTENNAS
Classical frequency independent antennas rely on
variations in geometry to obtain their broadband
behavior. A smaller scale portion radiates high
frequency components and a larger scale portion
radiates lower frequency components of a signal.
Because the phase center moves as a function of
frequency, frequency independent antennas radiate
dispersed signals.
For instance, consider a log spiral antenna. Figure 1
shows a 1-11 GHz log spiral antenna. This antenna is
fed from the tip of the cone where the spiral has a
smaller scale. Lower frequency components must
propagate to the larger scale structure at the base of the
antenna before they radiate. Figure 2 shows the result
of this physical structure on a received signal. The
transmit antenna accepts a transmitted impulse voltage
signal (lewred) at its terminals. A receive antenna then
yields a received impulse voltage signal (righthlue) at
its terminals. The dispersion of the log spiral antennas
used for both transmit and receive results in a dispersed
receive signal. This dispersion is clearly manifest in
two respects. Fmt, the received signal has a temporal
extent over twice as long as the transmit signal. Second,
the received signal shows a distinct “chirp.” The earlier
portion of this signal exhibits relatively high frequency
content with a shorter time duration between zero
crossings. The later portion of the received signal
exhibits relatively low frequency content with a longer
time duration between zero crossings.
 . , ,, . , .
; ’.,
Fifiure 1: Log conical spiral antennas
(02004 H. Schank).
_” -l d a d R e x e d l 5 ~ EUGH2 Inairer
.
U os I is ? 21 t 3) I 65
IR(.IP,l
. . ..............
Figure 2: Transmitted (le#/red) and received
(rightblue) voltage waveforms from a pair of
conical log spiral antennas (02004 H. Schantz).
A third disadvantage of dispersion is not immediately
evident in Figure 2’s boresight response. Because the
phase center moves as a function of frequency, the
temporal extent and “chirpiness” of the received signal
will vary as a function of look angle.
Certainly, it may be possible to compensate for
dispersion [I]. Nevertheless, good system performance
is easier to achieve using UWB antenna elements that
are as non-dispersive as possible.
3 . DISPERSION OF SMALL ELEMENT UWB ANTENNAS
In recent years interest in small element UWB antennas
has increased. One of the most popular small element
dipole antenna families is planar elliptical dipoles’[2].
Thcse antennas have many desirable properties
including a flat dipole-like pattern and gain for at least a
3:l span of frequencies. Also, typical return loss may
he -20 dB or better across a significant bandwidth.
Finally, elliptical dipoles tend to radiate a very compact
and non-dispersive waveform. Figure 3 shows a pair of
elliptical dipole antennas with a 3.8 cm minor axis and a
4.8 cm major axis (a 1.291 axial ratio).
Figure 3: 1.25:l axial ratio planar elliplicol dipoles
~ cm elements (02004 H. Schaniz).
with 4 . 8 3.8
....... ........
i ........
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ I I - S O C H ~ I ~ ~ L ? ~
.............
U n5 I IS 2 ?I, 2, 35 6 eS I 51 6:
s 55 6 .l.%Ui
............. .............
.........
Figure 4: Transmitted (IeJVred) and received
(right/blire) voltage waveformsfrom apair of
planar elliptical dipole antennas
(02004 H. Schank).
With a pair of non-dispersive planar elliptical dipole
antennas, the received voltage signal is qualitatively
indistinguishable from the transmitted voltage signal.
Figure 4 shows transmitted (letbred) and received
(righthlue) voltage waveforms from a pair of planar
elliptical dipole antennas.
4. MODELINGDISPERSION OF
SMALL ELEMENT UWB ANTENNAS
Time domain electromagnetics is sometimes regarded as
an obscure and complicated subject. Nevertheless, there
are a few handy “rules of thumb” that may provide great
insight to the time domain behavior of ultra-wideband
antennas. ’
The “right-hand rule” is a very basic concept that allows
one to readily determine the orientation of an induction
magnetic field. A similar rule holds for determining the
orientation of a radiation magnetic field 131.
Maxwell’s equations (as traditionally written in the
Hertz-Heaviside form) express electric and magnetic
fields as functions of the time derivative of the opposite
162 -
field component. For calculation purposes, it is more , .
convenient to express the fields in terms of charge . . . .
densities and current densities. This approach yields a . .
generalized Coulomb’s law and a generalized Biot-
Savart law to allow a calculation of the electric and
magnetic fields, respectively. .-.---
.....-........
~

“ind %d
Jefimenko has used this method to obtain a generalized
Biot-Savart Law:

1 aJ
H=;,[~+&]+ (1) Figure 6a (lefl): The right-hand nile f i r induction
magneticjields: currents (0yield inductionjields
(02004 H. Schanh).
(Hind,
where J is the current density, x is’the vector i?om the
source point to the field point, and the square braces Figure 66 {right): The right-hand rule for radiation
denote that the enclosed quantities are to be evaluated at magneticfields: the time derivative of current (i)
):
the retarded time (t + t - [4-61. Figure 5 shows the yields radiationfields (Had (02004 H. Schaniz).
. ..

geometry involved in this equation. Taking r as the

vector Eom the origin to the field point (p), and r’ A few Simple relations allow a quick, qualitative
the vector from the origin to the point, then = evaluation of the time dependent fields around an
- r’ is the vector i?om the source point tb the field point. antenna.

Rule 1: Currents are concentrated on the edges of

planar structures. Therefore replace planar smctures
with equivalent line sources on their edges. A quick
historical note: Heinrich Hertz identified this rule over a
century ago.

X
yuj
-.
Figure 5: Geomehy for using Jejimenko’s Biot-savafl
law (02004 H. Schantz).
For our purposes though, we require only a few simple
obsemations. nef i s t term ofjefimeko’s Biot-Savart
law (Eq. 1) expresses the dependence of the induction
portion ofthe magnetic field on the CUrrentdensity (J),
The second term shows an analogous dependence of the
radiation of the magnetic field on the time rate
of change of the current density (dJ/dt). Thus, just as
the naditional right-hand rule reveals the orientation of
the induction magnetic field about a current (I), there is
an analogous right-hand rule that reveals the orientation
of the radiation magnetic field about the time rate of
change of current (dI/dt). Figures 6a and 6b show the
induction and radiation right-hand rules, respectively.
1
“Just as electriciq when distributed by
electrostatic induction would tend to
accumulate on the sharp edge of the strip. so
here the current ;;;:ew:
move along the edge.”
,;I
Rule 2: For typical quarter-wave scale antenna elements
with excitations whose bandwidth is on the order of a
couple of octaves or less, one may assume i I .-
3: Both Current I and rate of change of Current
dUdt decrease with distance from the feed point. Thus, a
good qualitatively acurate model of antenna currents
consists of a cosine tapered current, maximal at the feed
tapering Off to at the ends of an
Taking “x” as a generalized coordinate Eom a feed point
(x = 0) to an end Point (1= Lh the Current (4 ~ ~ X I E S :
I = I o cos-X
(2)
L

- 163 -
Rule 4: The source point (or phase center) for radiated
fields in a particular direction of interest is where the
line source runs perpendicular to the direction of
interest. This follows from combining the right-hand
rule for radiation with the Poynting vector to obtain the
orientation of the electric field
S=ExH. (3)
Of course, radiation from an infinitesimal linear current
-
element has a dipole pattem dependence sine where 0
is measured from the axis of the current element.
Nevertheless, the assumption of Rule 4 is generally
comect for elements with curved perimeters and vastly
simplifies calculation.
Rule 5: A voltage signal propagates at the speed of
light along the edge of an element, then radiates a time
dependent field proportional to the second time
-
derivative of the voltage signal (E@) dV(t)/dt). The
radiated field similarly propagates at the speed of light.
5 . EXAMPLE
OF
SMALL ELEMENT UWB ANTENNA DISPERSION
Figure 7 shows a planar loop antenna [8].
Simple Model of Planar Loop Antenna
Near / Note that the orientation of the current is different for
Far
Source
/w/
, angle is approximately proportional to:
Figure 7: A simple model of a planar loop antenna
(02004 H. Schanfz).
For simplicity, we may replace the element with an
equivalent line source (Rule I). Consider radiation in a
particular direction at an angle $ with respect to the feed
point. Then (by Rule 4) the phase center is that element
of the line source that is oriented perpendicular to the
direction of radiation. Thus, there will be two sources, a
“near source” at an angle $ and a “far source” at an
angle n - $. Assume a Gaussian voltage signal:
-1164-
~ ( t=) exp[- (n t ~ ) ’ ] . (4)
Then (by Rule 5 ) , the radiated fields from each source
point will be proportional to:
-
~ ( t )(1 - ~ ( (t-p/c)L)’
n exp[-(n(r -p/c)f,)’] (5)
where p is the path length. The principal challenge of
this method for assessing dispersion lies in determining
the appropriate path length for the two sources.
For the near source, the voltage signal propagates along
a path of length R r$ from the feed to the near source
where R is the radius of the line element. Then, the
signal radiates from a point that is a distance R closer to
the field point than tht origin. Thus, the effective path
for the near source is:
pnem($)= R (4- 1) + r
(6)
where r is the radial distance from the origin. For the
far source, the voltage signal propagates along a path of
length R (n - Q) from the feed lo the far source. Then,
the signal radiates from a point that is a distance R
further from the field point than the origin. Thus, the
effective path for the far source is:
pjaX+)= R (n - 4 + 1) + 7. (7)
the near source and the far source. Also (by Rule 3), the
current is strongest at the feed point and weakest at the
opposite side of the loop. Thus,
-
Enem($) +Cos(W) (8)
and
-
EpX$) -cos[(n-QY21. (9)
Finally, the total radiated field as a function of time and
E($, 0 -Enem($, 0 + En.dr$, 0
-cos[$/2] (1 -2(r (t-R(Q-l)/c-r/c)jJ2
exp[-(a(f -R($-l)/c-r/c)/J2]
- COS[(X-@)/~]
(1 - 2(n (t-R(n-$+l)/c-r/c)~)~
exp[-(n(f-R(rr-r$tl)/c-r/c)f,)’]. (IO)
Taking R = 11.9 mm, f = 1.5 ns,L = 2.0 GHz, and c =
30 c d n s , Figure 8 displays the time domain electric
fields over a 120 cm x 120 cm region centered on the
origin (the antenna element is not to scale).

Figure 8: Waveform radiated by aplanar loop antenna.
Light colors indicate positive electricfield
amplitude while dark colors indicafe negative
electric field amplifude
(02004 H. Schanb).
Note the variation in the waveform shape as a function
of azimuthal angle $. In the direction of the feed, the
waveform is a positive “Gaussian W waveform. As
the azimuthal angle increases, the amplitude of the
center peak decreases until the radiated waveform
becomes a negative Gaussian W.
The reason for this variation is that the relative path
difference varies as a function of $. For small 4,pmnm($)
is small and^,^,($) is large. For large 4, p..,($) is large
and p@,(b) is relatively small. Thus the two
contibutions to the radiated field (near and far) sweep
past each other in time, adding up conshuctively for
small +, destructively for $ - 120 degrees, and
constructively again (but yielding an inverted
waveform) for +- 180 degrees.
For a UWB antenna element to be non-dispersive, there
must be minimal variation in the relative delay between
paths of various signal components.
- 165 -
6. CONCLUSIONS
Dispersion of signals from UWB antennas is a serious
problem confronting the designers of UWB systems.
Traditional narrowband antenna measurement
techniques do no do a good job of assessing dispersion
of UWB signals. However, it is possible to use a
relatively straightfonvard analytic technique to
qualitatively determine the time domain radiated fields
around a UWB antenna and inspect the field pattem for
evidence of dispersion.
7.ACKNOWLEGEMENT
The figures ofthe present paper are reproduced from the
author’s book, UWB Antennu Design, to be published
by Artech House in 2005.
8. REFERENCES
[I] T. Hertel and G. Smith, “On the Dispersive
Properties of the Conical Spiral Antenna and Its
Use for Pulse Radiation,” IEEE Transactions on
Antennas and Propagation, Vol. 51, No. 7, July
2003, pp. 1426-33.
[2] H. Schantz, “Planar Elliptical Element UWB Dipole
Antennas,” IEEE A P S Conference Proceedings
(June 2002).
[3] H. Schantz, ‘%lectromagnetic Radiation Made
Simple,” APS/AAPT Joint Meeting (April 1997).
[4] 0. Jefimenko, Electricity andMagneiism
(Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1966), 815-
7,pp. 515-518.
151
. .D. Griffiths and M. Heald. “Time-deuendent
generalizations of the Biot-Savart akd Coulomb
laws,” Am. I.Phys. 59,111-117 (1991).
[6] H. Schantz, “The flow of electromagnetic energy in
an electric dipole decay,” Am. J. Phys. 63,513-520
(1995).
171 H. Hertz, Electric Wuves,(London: Macmillan and
Co., 1893) p.164.
[8] H. Schantz, “Planar loop antenna,” U S . Patent
6,593,886 (July 15,2003).