ALTAIR FEKO FOR COMPLEX PERMITTIVITY EVALUATION

USING CAVITY PERTURBATION TECHNIQUE

D.V.B.Murthy – Application Engineer, Altair / C.J. Reddy – Vice President, Altair / February 2021

This paper presents use of Altair Feko [1] simulations for the evaluation of complex permittivity of materials using cavity perturbation
technique.

1. Introduction
Measurement of complex permittivity of materials plays a very prominent role in several industrial, scientific, and medical applications [2
– 6]. Resonant structures (such as coaxial, dielectric, and cavity resonators) are used to characterize materials at microwave frequencies
[2,3]. Among these, microwave cavity resonators are popular because they present the advantage of high resonance behavior (Q factor)
and hence good sensitivity.

In this white paper, cavity resonator simulations using Feko for the evaluation of complex permittivity are presented. Section 2 presents
the details and theoretical background of the cavity perturbation technique and realization using conventional rectangular resonators.
Section 3 provides the design procedure, simulation results of the rectangular cavity resonator. Dielectric constant and loss simulations
were performed for preliminary analysis. Furthermore, standard samples of different dielectric permittivity are chosen for the analysis.
Cavity perturbation formulas were used to evaluate the dielectric constant and dielectric loss values.

2. Theoretical Background
Microwave cavity resonators are widely employed for dielectric material characterization using cavity perturbation technique (CPT). A
microwave cavity resonator is a metallic enclosure that confines the electromagnetic energy and possesses resonant properties.
Resonant cavities can have a very high quality factor (Q) and can be built to handle relatively large amounts of power. For complex
permittivity measurements, the sample material under test is located at a position of maximum electric field (E) of the resonator, and it
creates a perturbation that is reflected in variations in the resonant frequency. Changes in the resonant frequency fs and quality factor
Qs are related to the dielectric properties of the sample material.

The cavity perturbation expressions for the evaluation of the complex dielectric permittivity are given as follows [4]:

𝑉𝑐 𝑓2 − 𝑓𝑠2
𝜀′ = 1 + [0 ] (1)
4𝑉𝑠 𝑓𝑠2

𝑉𝑐 𝑓02 1 1
𝜀 ′′ = [ − ] (2)
4𝑉𝑠 𝑓12 𝑄𝑠 𝑄𝑐

Where, ’ and ’’ are the real and imaginary parts of complex permittivity, f0 and fs are the resonant frequency of the empty and sample
loaded cavity, respectively, Q0 and Qs are the quality factors of the empty and sample loaded cavity, respectively, and Vc and Vs are the
volume of the cavity and the sample, respectively.

3. Design of Cavity Resonator

A rectangular cavity resonator is made from a rectangular waveguide by shorting the two ends. Its structural dimensions include width
a, height b, and length d. For a rectangular cavity resonator, there are two groups of resonant modes (TE mnp and TMmnp), which
correspond to the TEmn and TMmn propagation modes in a rectangular waveguide respectively. The first two subscripts m and n come
from the wave propagation modes TEmn and TMmn, and they represent the changing cycles along the x and y directions. The last
subscript p represents the changing cycles along the z direction.

The formula for the resonant frequency (TEmnp mode) is given below.

1 2 2 2
𝑓𝑟 = √(𝑚) + (𝑛) + (𝑝 ) (3)
2√𝜇0 𝜀0 𝑎 𝑏 𝑑
where, fr is the resonant frequency of the resonant cavity; m, n and p are the number of half wavelengths along X,Y and Z-axes
respectively; a, b and d are the dimensions of the cavity along X,Y and Z-axes respectively; ε0 is the permittivity of the free space; μ0 is
the permeability of the free space.

A TE103 mode cavity resonator at X band is designed using the above equation and simulated using Feko. Finite Element Method
(FEM) in Feko is used for simulating the rectangular cavity resonator. Probe coupling was chosen for the excitation of the cavity
resonator structure. FEM Modal port in Feko was used to implement the probe coupling. Figure 1(a) depicts the schematic of the cavity
resonator. The dimensions of the cavity resonator are 22.86x10.16X66 mm3. It resonates at 9.636 GHz and has Q-factor of 3784. The
resonant frequency of the cavity obtained from equation (3) is 9.462 GHz. The slight difference in the resonant frequency is mainly due
to the probe insertion which was used to excite the cavity which was not considered in the theoretical equation (3). Figure 1(b)
illustrates the E-field of the TE103 cavity resonator at resonant frequency. Figure 1 (c) represents the top and side view of the cavity
resonator and the simulated resonant frequency of the cavity and Figure 1(d) shows the simulated resonant behavior of the cavity.

Sample
Probe under test
Coupling

(a) (b)

Top View

Side View

(c) (d)
Figure 1(a) Layout of the TE103 rectangular cavity resonator. Figure 1(b) E-field distribution of the cavity resonator and sample under
test. Figure 1(c) Top view and side view of the cavity resonator. Figure 1(d) simulated resonant frequency of the cavity.
4. Complex Permittivity Evaluation
4a Measurement of resonant properties
In resonant methods, we measure the resonant frequency and quality factor of the measurement fixture. As the resonant frequency
can be easily determined from S-Parameters in the frequency domain, we focus on the measurement of the quality factor.

The quality factor (Q) can be calculated according to

𝑓0
𝑄= (4)
∆𝑓

Where f0 is the resonant frequency, Δf is the half-power bandwidth.

Half-Power Bandwidth can be determined using the Reflection method. This is a one port method, and the parameter we directly
measure is the scattering parameter S11. As shown in Figure 2 , The S11 value for determining the half-power width is
𝑆11,𝑓0/10
10𝑆11,𝑏/10 +10
𝑆11,∆𝑓 = 10. 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 ( ) (5)
2

Where S11,b is the S11 value of the baseline of the resonance, and S11,f0 is the S11 value at the resonant frequency.

Figure 2 Measurement of quality factor from S11.

4b Complex Permittivity evaluation using FEKO simulations

Complex permittivity evaluation based on simulations consists of two parts. In the first part, the dielectric constant of the sample ( 𝜀𝑠′ )
characterization is carried out by having no dielectric losses in the sample (𝜀𝑠′′ =0). Samples of different dielectric constant (1, 3, 5, 7 &
10) values with no losses are chosen for the simulations. The dielectric properties of the sample materials are related to variations in
the frequency response of the cavity resonator. Figure 3(a) presents the frequency response with the insertion of different dielectric
samples (1, 3, 5, 7 and 10). It is important to note that the resonant frequency shifts towards the lower frequencies (downwards) when
the dielectric sample is inserted inside the resonator. In the second part, 𝜀𝑠′′ characterization is performed by keeping the parameter 𝜀𝑠′
constant value (one). Simulations are performed by choosing different dielectric loss values ranging from 0 to 0.1 by keeping the
dielectric constant value at one. Figure 3(b) shows the change in frequency response (Q-factor) of the resonator by introducing lossy
samples into the resonator.

Different dielectric samples of 2 mm diameter and 10.16 mm height are placed at the E-field maximum position of the cavity resonator.
The shift in the resonant frequency due to the introduction of the sample (with dielectric constant values) is in the order of 10 MHz - 350
MHz maximum and the maximum fractional change observed in the quality factor is 0.4–0.75. Based on the resonant frequency shift
and change in the Q-factor, 𝜀𝑠′ and 𝜀𝑠′′ are computed using equations (1) and (2) respectively.

Table 1 presents the calculated values of different dielectric constant (ε’) and dielectric loss (ε”) compared to the values used in the
simulations. Table 1 validates the process used for evaluating the dielectric permittivity values using cavity resonator.
 (a) (b)
Figure 3(a) Shift in the resonant frequency due to the introduction of different dielectric constant samples into the cavity resonator.
Figure 3(b) Change in the Q-factor due to the introduction of different dielectric loss tangent samples into the cavity resonator.

TABLE 1: Dielectric Constant and Dielectric Loss Simulations.

Dielectric constant (𝜺′𝒔 ) Dielectric loss (𝜺′′

𝒔)

Values used Values computed using Error (%) Values used Values computed using Error (%)
in the eq (1) based on the in the eq (2) based on the
simulations resonant frequency simulations resonant frequency
shift (Figure 3(a)) shift (Figure 3b))

1 1 - 0 0 -

3 3.066 2% 0.02 0.0194 3%

5 5.290 6% 0.04 0.0386 4%

7 7.576 8% 0.08 0.0754 6%

10 9.849 2% 0.1 0.0931 7%

4c Complex Permittivity evaluation on Standard Samples:

To further validate the process, commercially available dielectric materials with different permittivity properties are characterized for the
resonant frequencies fs and quality factors Qs. Figure 4 depicts the reflection coefficient responses of the resonant cavity loaded with air
and sample (RTDuroid 6010.8LM). Figure 4 (Insert Picture) shows the resonant frequency of the sample with half power bandwidth
points and shifted resonant frequency of the cavity. One can evaluate the dielectric constant from the shift in the resonant frequency
and the Q-factor using the half power bandwidth method (procedure described in section 4a) due to the sample placed in the resonant
cavity. Similar procedure was used for dielectric characterization of Teflon [4], Quartz [5], Rogers RT/Duroid 6010.2LM [8], and Rogers
RT/Duroid 6010.8LM [8] samples. The samples are shaped in a cylindrical form with 2 mm diameter and 10.16 mm height and are
placed at the E-field maximum position of the cavity resonator. Figure 5 shows the simulated reflection coefficient for the cavity before
perturbation, and after perturbation with air,Teflon, Quartz, RT/Duroid 6010.2LM and RT/Duroid 6010.8LM samples. Table 2 shows the
complex permittivity values εs using the equations (1) and (2) and using the resonant frequency and Q-factor changes from the
simulations (Figure 5). The obtained permittivity values are in good agreement with the reference [4,5 and 8] values.
 Figure 4 Reflection Coefficient responses of the cavity resonator for Air and RT Duroid 6010.8 dielectric samples.

Figure 5 Reflection Coefficient responses of the cavity resonator for various standard dielectric samples.

TABLE 2: Characterized 𝜺𝒔 values of materials from Feko simulations

DIELECTRIC MEDIA Dielectric constant (𝜺′𝒔 ) Dielectric loss (𝜺′′

𝒔)

Reference Cavity Resonance Error (%) Reference Cavity Resonance Error (%)
[4,5 and 8] Method (eq 1) [4,5 and 8] Method (eq 2)

Air 1.0 1 - 0 0 -

Teflon 2.1 2.097 0% 0.001 0.0012 9%

Quartz 4.2 4.374 4% 0 -0.00028

6010.2LM 10.2 11.172 10% 0.0023 0.0022 4%

6010.8LM 10.8 11.812 9% 0.0023 0.0021 9%

5. Conclusion
A cavity perturbation technique using a rectangular cavity resonator has been presented for the evaluation of complex permittivity of
materials. A detailed analysis on the design of the rectangular cavity resonator (TE103 mode) was presented. Feko Simulations were
performed on various standard dielectric samples using the rectangular cavity resonator. Samples of different complex dielectric
constant values ranging from 𝜀𝑠′ =1 to 10 and dielectric loss values ranging from 𝜀𝑠′′ = 0 to 0.1 have been chosen for analysis.
Resonant frequencies and Q factors for all these samples are obtained. The evaluated values of complex permittivity from the
simulations are in good agreement with the reference values. Furthermore, we used this technique and performed Feko simulations on
several commercial dielectric samples (Teflon, Quartz, 6010.2LM and 6010.8LM). The obtained simulated dielectric constant and loss
values of the commercial samples are in good agreement with the reference values [4,8]. One can adopt this methodology to
implement the design of cavity resonator (square/cylindrical/coaxial shaped) and understand the E-field mode patterns and electric field
maximum positions for appropriate sample placement using Feko simulations. Furthermore, they can be utilized for real time microwave
measurements to evaluate the complex permittivity of the dielectric materials.

6. References

[1] Altair Feko, Altair Engineering, Inc., https://www.altair.com/feko/

[2] E. Nyfors, “Industrial microwave sensors – A review”, Subsurf. Sens. Tech. Appl., Vol. 1, 23-43, Jan. 2000.

[3] L. F. Chen, C. K. Ong, C. P. Neo, V. V. Varadan, and V. K. Varadan, Microwave Electronics: Measurements and Materials
Characterization, Wiley, New York, 2004.

[4] V. Subramanian, V. Sivasubramanian, V. R. K. Murthy, and J. Sobhanadri, “Measurement of complex dielectric permittivity of
partially inserted samples in a cavity perturbation technique”, Rev. Sci. Instrum. Vol.67, No.1, 279 - 282, Jan. 1996.

[5] Humberto Lobato-Morales, Alonso Corona-Chávez, D. V. B. Murthy, and José L. Olvera-Cervantes,” Complex permittivity
measurements using cavity perturbation technique with substrate integrated waveguide cavities”, Rev. Sci. Instrum. Vol.81, No.6, 279 -
282, May. 2010.

[6] A. Verma and D. C. Dube, ”Measurement of dielectric parameters of small samples at X-band frequencies by cavity perturbation
technique”, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. Vol. 54, No.5, 2120 – 2123, Oct. 2005.

[7] E. G. Spencer, R. C. Lecraw, and L. A. Ault, “Note on cavity perturbation theory”, J. Appl. Phys., Vol. 28, 1 No. 130 - 132, Jan. 1957.

[8] Rogers Corporation©, High Freq. Laminates. www.rogerscorp.com/.