Polarization Properties of Finite Ultra-wideband Arrays

Michael Y. Lee1 , Rick W. Kindt2 , and Marinos N. Vouvakis1

1

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
micylee@engin.umass.edu, vouvakis@engin.umass.edu

7
6
Y-Elements
4
5
3
1

Abstract An important consideration when establishing

the radiation characteristics of phased arrays is the polarization purity for scan situations, dened as the ratio between the co-/cx-polarization levels at the particular scan.
Two accepted methods for determining the polarization
levels of an array will be used to quantify nite array truncation effects on polarization purity of ultra-wideband arrays. Simulated nite array results are used to examine
the polarization properties of a Vivaldi array and a planar
ultra-wideband modular antenna (PUMA) array, and are
compared with respective innite array results.

Naval Research Laboratory, Radar Division

Washington, D.C. 20375, USA
rick.kindt@nrl.navy.mil

I. INTRODUCTION

The more commonly used technique for quantifying

the polarization properties of a phased array is the central embedded element method. This method involves
the excitation of a single central element of the array with
all other ports matched, and observing the co and cx embedded element patterns at the desired scan angle. This
method is widely used in experimental setups due to its
simplicity, expediences, and affordability. Fig. 1 shows
the excited central embedded element for an 88 PUMA
array. In contrast, the full-array method requires the
excitation of each individual antenna element (of a single
polarization), and then observing the co and cx patterns at
the location of the main beam. This method although represents the array eld deployment, and leads to exact results is either expensive (multiple T/R modules required),
or very slow (where array far-eld is obtained by the vectorial summation of all embedded element patterns).
The embedded element method however does not
represent the actual deployment of the antenna in the
eld. This leads to the question of whether the central embedded element method, which is only an approximation
of the full-array characteristics, is sufcient in providing
data about the polarization purity of nite ultra-wideband
(UWB) arrays.

4
5
X-Elements

Fig. 1. Top-view of an 88 PUMA array with central embedded

element highlighted in red.

II. FINITE ARRAY CONFIGURATION

An investigation of the polarization purity of two
UWB arrays was conducted. The rst array was a
single-polarized 10:1 Vivaldi array (without ground
plane backing) and the secondary was a dual-polarized
6:1 planar ultra-wideband modular antenna (PUMA)
array (with a nite ground plane backing) [1]. The operating frequency of the PUMA array was 3.53-21.2GHz
whereas the Vivaldi array operated from 1.2-12GHz.
In-house Domain Decomposition - Finite Element
Method (DD-FEM) nite array simulations were carried
out for both antenna types with array sizes of 88, 1616,
and 3232. Frequencies close to the grating frequency
(fg ) of each array were observed. For both arrays and
methods, the polarization ratio was observed at the =
45 (D-plane) since that is the plane where the polarization purity deteriorates signicantly, thus is the limiting
factor in the design. Ludwigs third denition (L3D) of
cross-polarization is used as the basis for interpreting
the co-/cx-polarization levels [2]. The polarization ratio

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
0

45DPlane (Infinite 10:1 Vivaldi Array)

45DPlane (8x8 10:1 Vivaldi Array)
45DPlane (16x16 10:1 Vivaldi Array)
45DPlane (32x32 10:1 Vivaldi Array)

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Elevation Angle T [deg]

50

55

60

PolRat

L3D

(45q, T, 10000)

Fig. 2. Vivaldi Polarization Ratio vs. Elevation Angle at Dplane for different array sizes (Embedded Element Method).
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
0

45DPlane (Infinite 10:1 Vivaldi Array)

45DPlane (8x8 10:1 Vivaldi Array)
45DPlane (16x16 10:1 Vivaldi Array)

L3D

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
0

45DPlane (Infinite 6:1 PUMA Array)

45DPlane (8x8 6:1 PUMA Array)
45DPlane (16x16 6:1 PUMA Array)
45DPlane (32x32 6:1 PUMA Array)

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Elevation Angle T [deg]

45

50

55

60

Fig. 4. PUMA Polarization Ratio vs. Elevation Angle at Dplane for different array sizes (Embedded Element Method).

L3D

PolRat

L3D

(45q, T, 10000)

where and are the scanning azimuthal and elevation angle, f the frequency of operation, and Eco and
Ecx , the co- and cross-polarized radiated eld at the appropriate Ludwigs denition.

PolRat

(1)

(45q, T, 20000)

Eco,L3D (o , o , f )
.
Ecx,L3D (o , o , f )

PolRat

P olRatL3D (o , o , f ) =

(45q, T, 20000)

(PolRat) can be determined as:

50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
0

45DPlane (Infinite 6:1 PUMA Array)

45DPlane (8x8 6:1 PUMA Array)
45DPlane (16x16 6:1 PUMA Array)
45DPlane (32x32 6:1 PUMA Array)

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Elevation Angle T [deg]

45

50

55

60

Fig. 5. PUMA Polarization Ratio vs. Elevation Angle at Dplane for different array sizes (Full-Array Method).

ground plane. The central embedded element method did

not appear to converge to the innite one, as the array increased in size, indicating that it may not be appropriate
to use for these cases.
5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Elevation Angle T [deg]

50

55

60

Fig. 3. Vivaldi Polarization Ratio vs. Elevation Angle at Dplane for different array sizes (Full-Array Method).

III. RESULTS

IV. CONCLUSIONS

The polarization properties of a nite Vivaldi and

PUMA arrays were compared to innite ones using two
methodologies. In the case of Vivaldi arrays in free space,
both the central embedded element method and full-array
method match the innite array results, indicating little
or no polarization truncation effects. Whereas for nite
PUMA arrays, the central embedded element method was
susceptible to ripples that do not appear to converge to the
innite case as the array size increases. This suggests that
the central embedded element method may not be universally appropriate for quantifying the polarization properties of UWB arrays.

The diagonal (D) plane polarization ratios of the Vivaldi arrays are shown in Figs. 2 and 3 as a function
of the elevation angle for different array sizes using the
embedded element method and full-array method respectively. The polarization ratio, regardless of size, decreases
rapidly as it is scanned off-axis from broadside and at 45
a polarization reversal is observed. It is noted here that
high values of PolRat indicate good polarization purity.
The central embedded element method shown in Fig. 2
REFERENCES
matches well with the results of an innite array (shown [1] J. Logan and M. Vouvakis, Planar ultrawideband
in black), simulated using a full-array innite approach.
modular antenna (PUMA) arrays scalable to mmFig. 3 for the full-array method shows a much tighter
waves, in Antennas and Propagation Society Int.
match when scanning the array, regardless of array size.
Symp., 2013 IEEE, July 2013, pp. 624625.
The plots of the D-plane polarization ratio for the [2] A. Ludwig, The denition of cross polarization,
PUMA arrays are shown in Figs 4 and 5. All nite arAntennas and Propagation, IEEE Trans., vol. 21,
ray cases contain ripples possibly attributed to the nite
no. 1, pp. 116119, Jan 1973.