Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1536
RADIO SECTION
621.396.677.3
2
"l=1
Zm
As
(1) INTRODUCTION
The work described in the present paper had its origin in the
so-called "super gain" theorem relating to directional aerials.
This states that it is possible to design an aerial of arbitrarily
small dimensions with a directivity as high as desired. The
theorem applies only when there is sufficient freedom to fill the
finite space occupied by the array with either a continuous
current distribution or an unlimited number of discrete radiators.
Closely connected is a second theorem which can be stated in
the following way:19 The bandwidth and radiation efficiency of
an aerial decrease if its gain is held constant while its size is
reduced below that of a conventional aerial having this gain.
The concept of super-gain arrays apparently contradicts the
common experience that an increase in the gain of an aerial
must be accompanied by an increase in its size, and is apt to be
considered an academic curiosity. It is not therefore surprising
LIST OF PRINCIPAL SYMBOLS
that the super-gain theorem was forgotten and rediscovered6-9
n Total number of elements in array.
twice during the 24 years following its initial discovery.1 Meanwhile,
intermittent attempts8-11'13 were being made to calculate
Zmm = Rmm + J^mm Self-impedance of element m.
Z/m = i?/m + jXlm = Mutual impedance between elements / "optimum" current distribution for systems where there is, in
fact, no finite upper limit to the directivity.
and m.
Im = l'm + //^ = Current in mth element.
The second of the two theorems stated above is of great
Vm = V'm + jV'n = Potential difference between the ter- practical importance to the aerial designer who wishes to know
minals of the mth element.
whether or not it is economical to use an aerial with a directivity
P = Radiated power.
higher than normal.* Recent work20-23-26 on this aspect of the
H = Received field strength at some distant problem has taken the form of computing current distributions
point in a direction of maximum for particular super-directive arrays, and pointing out that these
radiation.
are associated with very large current amplitudes, and hence
Is = Current in a reference element.
with low efficiencies.
Hs = Received field strength when the referThe methods used to find these current distributions do not
ence element is substituted for the consider the radiation efficiency of the array, nor do they lead
array.
to maximum directivity, where the aerial system is so restricted
Rs = Self-impedance of reference element.
that a maximum exists.
6m = Electrical angular distance from a
If one considers the current distribution required on an array
reference plane (perpendicular to the of a finite number of fixed elements to produce an arbitrarily
direction in which the array is to selected directivity, less than the maximum directivity, one may
have maximum gain) to the mth expect to find an infinity of such distributions, many of which
element. The positive direction is may be accompanied by low radiation efficiencies. This will be
from the reference plane towards the true whether the selected directivity is greater or less than
receiver.
normal. Consequently, to dismiss super-directive aerials as
impracticable23-26 merely because some extremely inefficient
Written contributions on papers published without being read at meetings are
Normal directivity is taken to mean that associated with an array of equalamplitude currents, chosen so that the distant field components are in phase.
[303]
304
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
Vm = 2 J/ <m
(i)
(2)
P = E i*mrm
(3)
and consequently (see Section 8.1.3) the expression for the power
gain of the array with respect to a reference element identically
similar to the elements of the array also simplifies to
G=\H\*IP
(5)
If the current distribution is such as to give maximum gain, a
first-order variation of this current distribution must leave the
gain invariant (to the same order).
The results of this variational principle can be simply expressed
in terms of the resistance voltage defined in Section 2.1:
The resistance voltages across the terminals of the individual
elements must vary over the array in magnitude and phase as
though they were thefieldstrength values at each element position
of a plane electromagnetic wave travelling across the array in the
direction in which the gain is to be a maximum.
Since only relative values of currents and voltages are of
interest, the amplitude of the resistance-voltage wave can conveniently be made equal to unity. Thus
*" = *-*
(6)
Eqn. (6b) fully specifies the current distribution over the whole
of the array.
The current in the mth element is given by
= 2
/ of the matrix
where the matrix glm is the inverse
(7)
rlm.
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
Comparing this equation with eqn. (3), it is clear that, since P
is real (see Section 8.1.1), the received field is real, and in the
present system of units they have the same numerical value.
Eqn. (5) then simplifies to
305
306
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
(12)
Table 1
RESULTS OF THEORETICAL COMPUTATION
Element number
1
2
3
-2-157 +1-473 +1-473
4
Real parts of currents..
-2-157
Imaginary parts of currents
-7-864 +18-327 -18-327 +7-864
Moduli of currents ..
8-155
18-386
18-386
8-155
Real parts of driving
point voltages
..
1-398 -12-694 +14-312 -2015
Imaginary parts of driving point voltages .. -0-976 +2-729 +1-553 -2-878
Driving-point resistances,
ohms
+5-1
+6-8
-1-6
-20-1
Driving-point reactances,
ohms
+14-4
+51-2
+57-2
+24-2
Input powers (relative) +340
+2288
-539
-1336
Power gain relative to A/2 dipole . . . 10-3 (10-1 db).
Current in A/2 dipole to give same field as array in same units as
above currents, 10-3.
Total radiated power (relative) . . . 73-1 x 10-3 = 753.
Power lost as heat in elements (relative) . . . 38 (0-2 db).
end-fire direction in phase (i.e. an "orthodox" end-fire arrangement), is plotted on the same diagram. The scales of the two
patterns are such that the maximum field strengths are the same.
(4.3) Feeder System
Reference to Table 1 shows that, in order to maintain the
specified current distribution, elements 3 and 4 must deliver
power to the feeder system. To obtain the full gain this power
must be returned to elements 1 and 2. A loss-less feeder network
supplying the required driving-point voltages automatically
takes care of this requirement. A discussion of the problem of
transmission lines terminated by impedances with negative
resistive parts will be found in Section 8.3.
Each element was fed through a network of lumped reactances
arranged as shown in Fig. 2. The networks were then connected
in parallel, using half-wavelengths of balanced twin feeder, and
the whole arrangement was fed with coaxial cable through a
balance-to-unbalance transformer.
The values of XP and Xs must be chosen for each of the four
networks so that, when the same input p.d. is applied to each
network across the points T, the currents in the respective
elements will be properly related to one another in magnitude
and phase. The number of ways in which this can be done is
theoretically unlimited. In practice, the reactance had to be
made from small components. Furthermore, it was convenient
to arrange that the admittance of the four elements in parallel
would approximately equal the characteristic admittance of the
feeder.
This method of feeding was selected for the ease with which
adjustments could be made. However, the values of the components chosen resulted in very high standing-wave ratios on
the half-wavelengths of feeder; in one case it was more than 80.
The components consisted of small coils or capacitors connected in parallel with trimming capacitors. Before the networks were assembled the reactance of each group of components was measured at the design frequency of the array, using
a slotted coaxial line. The trimming adjustment was provided
to allow for the difference between the actual driving-point
impedances of the elements of the array and those calculated
on the basis of infinitely thin half-wave dipoles.
(4.4) Gain and Bandwidth Measurements
The gain was measured by direct comparison between the
power delivered to the array and that delivered to a half-wave
dipole to produce the same field at a receiving aerial. The
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
150
160
170
180
170
160
150(
307
140c
130 c
4-element
super gain
array
Orthodox"end-fire array
having- elements in same
position as
\
the "super gain"array
50'
50'
308
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
|7
\\
x"
\
\
\
\
\
h
74
75
Frequency, Mc/s
/2TT
\ ~|
18
20
0-2
(13)
End-fire.
Broadside.
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
140
150
160
170
180
170
160
150
309
140
130'
60'
50c
50
30
40
20
10
10
20
30
40
0-6X
m
8-3
6 _
em
V-o"3 6
buojy
8-1
80
'3-s
0
005 01 015 0-2 0-25 0 3
Distance of centre dipole from one end of
array, wavelengths
005
010
015
0-20 0-25 0-30
Element spacing , 0, wavelengths
Fig. 7.Variation of maximum gain of a symmetrical 4-element
end-fire array with position of inner elements.
310
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
\
Y
/
/
/
/1
.
1
//
16
^14
Il2
'a!
10
to
o
(7) BIBLIOGRAPHY
Super-Gain Arrays
(1) OSEEN, C. W.: "Die Einsteinsche Nadelstichstrahlung und die
Maxwellschen Gleichungen," Annalen der Physik, 1922, 69,
p. 202.
(2) HOWELL, W. T.: "Electromagnetic Waves from a Point Source,"
Philosophical Magazine, 1936, 21, p. 384.
(4)
(5)
/
9
10
4
5
6
7
Number of elements
Fig. 8.Array of equispaced parallel half-wave dipoles.
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
20
18
/
/
| 16
/
/
^14
/
/
Il2
/
/
/ /
/ /
y /
'
' A
/
/
/
/
/
/
,/
/
/
/
'I 2
C5
/ /
/
2
3
4 5 6 7 8 10
Number of elements
Fig. 9.Maximum end-fire gain of array of equispaced elements.
Array of half-wave dipoles.
Array of omnidirectional sources.
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
311
(32) CARTER, P. S.: "Circuit Relations in Radiating Systems and Appli- plane, the received field is, making the same simplification as
cations to Antenna Problems," Proceedings of the Institute of for eqn. (4),
Radio Engineers, 1932, 20, p. 1004 (see also 1948, 36, p. 1003).
(33) MILNE, W. E.: "Numerical Calculus" (University Press, Princeton,
HS = IS
(16)
1949), pp. 15-35.
(34) KING, R., and MIDDLETON, D.: "The Cylindrical Antenna;
The radiated power from the reference element is
Current and Impedance," Quarterly of Applied Mathematics,
1946, 3, p. 302; 1946, 4, p. 199; and 1948, 6, p. 192.
nr = I2
(35) TAI, C. T.: "Coupled Antennas," Proceedings of the Institute of
Radio Engineers, 1948, 36, p. 487.
since in the normalization adopted, rs is unity.
(36) KING, R.: "Self- and Mutual Impedance of Parallel Identical
Antennas," Cruft Laboratory, Harvard University, Technical
Report No. 118, 1950 (shortened version in Proceedings of the (8.1.3) The Voltage Theorem for Maximum Gain for n Equal and
Indentically Oriented Elements.
Institute of Radio Engineers, 1952, 40, p. 981).
(37) KING, R.: "A Dipole with a Tuned Parasitic Radiator," Pro-'
The power gain of the array with respect to the reference
ceedings I.E.E., 1952, 99, Part III, p. 6.
(38) CROUT, P. D.: "A Short Method for Evaluating Determinants element is
and Solving Systems of Linear Equations with Real or Complex
iHl 2 I1
\H\2
Coefficients," Transactions of the American I.E.E., 1941, 60,
p. 1235.
\HS\2P~ p
u/;
(39) KRAUS, J. D.: "Antennas" (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1950).
(40) FISHENDEN, R. M., and WIBLIN, E. R.: "Design of Yagi Aerials,"
Write
U=\H\2
(18)
Proceedings I.E.E., 1949, 96, Part III, p. 5.
(41) SAXTON, J. A.: "Determination of Aerial Gain from its Polar
Diagram," Wireless Engineer, 1948, 25, p. 110.
so that
GP= U
(19)
(42) LAMONT, H. R. L., ROBERTSHAW, R. G., and HAMMERTON, T. G.:
If the currents in each element are slightly perturbed from the
"Microwave Communication Link," Wireless Engineer, 1947,
values which makes G a maximum,
24, p. 323.
(43) TERMAN, F. E.: "Radio Engineers' Handbook" (McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1943).
(20)
8G = 0
(8) APPENDICES
(8.1) Derivation of the Condition for Maximum Gain
(8.1.1) The Power Radiated.
hence
G8P = 8U
(21)
U = HH*
(22)
Therefore
8U = H&H* + H*8H
P = [V'J'm
= 2&H8H*
+V ' ^ ]
. . . . (14)
P=
(23)
hence
from
. (24)
m = \ 1=1
P=
= [(/;/; + W H J
m= i
l*m%hr,m+
8l*mIirlm . (25)
1=1
1=1
m=l
771=1 1 = 1
= r?8it + rm8i*m
/=1
ltnhrlm
(15)
m=\ 1=1
= i*mrm
0)
m= l
(26)
m= l
+ rrSl*
. (27)
= 2Tr8l*r
(28)
i / [(W-h,] = 0
Note that the power input to the zwth terminal is the real part of
ImVm, and not of J j , ^ . The latter expression omits all those
contributions to the power input which are due to mutual
reactance and which cancel in the summation over the whole
array.
(8.1.2) The Received Field.
Select a reference plane perpendicular to the direction in
which the array is to have maximum gain.
The received field at a distant point in this direction is given
by eqn. (4).
If the array is replaced by a reference element similar in all
respects to the elements of the array and situated in the reference
GMTr8l*
= &H8l*~JOr
(29)
Since eqn. (29) must be valid for any 8lr let 8lr first be chosen
so that T*8lr is imaginary. The left-hand side of eqn. (29) will
then be zero, and hence also the right-hand side, i.e. both
expressions following the^? sign will be purely imaginary. Then,
advancing the argument of 8lr by 77/2 will make both expressions real, allowing t h e ^ signs to be removed from the equation.
It follows that
Tr = ~e-J0r
(30)
312
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
(3D
2'
where
'In
'21
cos 6{
c o s &)
'22
A= -
771=1
',,
cos 62
. . COS0rt
'11
'12
'17,
r2
n2
'T1
cos
C
(32)
AT
COS d{
'22
'21
sin
sin
(33)
m=\
=S
771 =
(34)
2
1
s i n $>
(35)
The problem is now reduced to the same form as that discussed in Section 2. The maximum gain of the array, and the
modified currents Pm, can be calculated using the relations given
in that Section.
sin c
0
\n
n\
('ii = '22 =
2 rlrlm = cos 0n
i=i
n
m = l(l)n .
(36)
-sin
;;(-sin 0 j ]
(37)
For arrays of not more than about ten elements, eqns. (36)
can readily be solved on a desk-type calculating machine, using,
for example, Crout's method.33'38
If the array consists of elements symmetrically spaced along a
straight line, it is advantageous to choose the reference plane so
that it passes through the centre of the array. The values taken
by the cosine and sine functions in eqn. (36) are then respectively
symmetrical and skew symmetrical. It follows that the values
of /,' and 1'^ show the same symmetries, and the number of
simultaneous equations is halved.
(8.2.2) An Alternative Expression for Gain.
From eqns. (36) and (37) the gain could, of course, be written
explicitly in terms of the mutual resistances rlm and the angles
6m. In fact, with a little rearrangement, we obtain the following
form:
&
(38)
2n
and A =
r22
2 r,'rlm=
sin
l = \
r]m = rlm\hmh{
with
sin
n2
rt
= rnn = 1)
When the currents are required as well as the gain, eqn. (38)
has no particular merit, since the right-hand side of eqn. (37)
can be evaluated in a single operation on a calculating machine.
If, however, the gain only is required and the current magnitudes
are not of interest, e.g. if it is desired to examine the trend of
the gain as the element spacing or the number of elements
varies, there is some advantage in using eqn. (38). It is not
necessary in a particular case to evaluate the denominators
separately, since in Crout's method the values of the two terms
of G come out directly as the bottom right-hand terms of the
modified matrices obtained from the respective numerators.33
Eqn. (38) is particularly useful for dealing with limiting cases in
which elements coalesce, e.g. in the 3-element case shown in
Fig. 6, where the inner element coalesces with either of the outer
elements.
The approximations to the mutual resistances required for
this computation are reproduced here because they seem not to
be generally known:
m&2l-sinmp
to second order in S,
where i?p = Mutual resistance when spacing is p.
i? P+ s = Mutual resistance when spacing is p + 8.
m = 2TT/A
/=A/2
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
(40)
. . .)ohms
313
+ Eb
(44)
I=Ir-h
p Spacing
(45)
cj> = 2-nplX
r = 2-43765...
IZ,=
Ef + Eb
IZ0 = IfZ0-lbZ0=Ef-Eb
K= HL + A/16TT2 = 0 0271659 . . .
and
As far as the square term, eqn. (40) is given in Reference 39
(p. 267).
(46)
. (47)
/ = i / ( Z / + Z0)
(48)
Eb = y(Z,-ZQ)
(49)
. (41)
'
tn
. . . .
(42)
and
=
'"
(43)
+Z0
i.e. the reflected wave is larger than the incident wave, and thus
more energy is returned to the line than has arrived. This, of
course, is in agreement with the fact that for such values of Zl
(8.3) Transmission Lines Terminated by Negative Resistances
the energy consumption is negative.
Charts and formulae for transformation of impedances along
When optimum current distributions for arrays of aerials are
worked out it frequently happens that the driving-point resistance transmission lines are usually designed for use with values of
of one or more of the aerials is found to be negative, i.e. these \p\ less than unity, so that, at first sight, values of |p| greater
elements are drawing power from the array. For maximum than unity might appear inconvenient. But if a transmission line
gain this power has to be fed back to the other elements.* is cut at any point and it is found, say, looking to the right of
Suppose that each element is connected to a transmission line, the cut, that the line is here working into an impedance Zh
possibly through a network of some sort, and that these trans- there will be at the left of the cut an impedance Zt. This is
a simple consequence of the fact that impedance, in the sense
mission lines run to a common feed point.
When the standing-wave pattern on these transmission lines used here, is merely the ratio of voltage to current* and that
is considered a difficulty appears in connection with those lines both pairs of terminals have the same voltage across them but
which feed power from the array towards the feed point. It is the currents, while equal, are of opposite sign; if the current
usual to determine the standing-wave pattern from the "load" flows into one pair of terminals it must flow out of the other pair.
end of the line and work back towards the generator. It would If the impedance Z7 is terminating the line and has a reflection
therefore seem that in those cases just mentioned further analysis coefficient \p\ greater than unity, it is clear from eqn. (50) that
would be required in order to find the load presented to the line the impedance Zt to the left of the cut has a reflection coat this common feed point. However, this is not so; the standing efficient, \\\p\, less than unity.
wave pattern on all transmission lines is uniquely determined by
The transformation of the nominal load Z ; along a transthe load impedance (here, the aerial driving-point impedance) mission line towards the nominal generator (transformation
even if the real part of this quantity turns out to be negative, from loading-end impedance towards sending-end impedance)
and transmission-line equations can be applied in the usual way, can thus be solved by inserting the impedance Z/ in a formula
as can be seen from the following analysis of transmission line or chart intended for transformation from the actual generator
fundamentals.
towards the load (transformation from sending-end impedance
towards load impedance).
If the aerial is to be designed only for maximum directivity, without regard to the
losses incurred, it is, of course, much simpler to dissipate this energy by terminating
the elements concerned with impedances equal to the negative of their respective
driving-point impedances.
* This impedance must not be confused with the "internal" impedance which
informs us of the change in voltage associated with a change of current.
314
BLOCH, MEDHURST AND POOL: A NEW APPROACH TO THE DESIGN OF SUPER-DIRECTIVE AERIAL ARRAYS
elements becomes very tedious. However, a good approximation for the half-wave dipole system can be obtained from
Uzkov's omnidirectional-source expression as follows: Saxton's
formula41 gives an approximate value for the half-power beam
width of the Uzkov array. On the assumption that the slope of
the pattern in this region is given closely enough by Lamont's
formula,42 the modification of this half-power beam width when
the omnidirectional pattern is multiplied by the half-wave dipole
pattern can be calculated. Were it assumed that in every plane
containing the direction of maximum radiation the pattern is
changed in the same fashion, renewed application of the Saxton
formula would give the gain of the array thus modified. However, since the pattern remains unchanged in the plane at right
angles to the plane of polarization, the final approximation is
obtained by taking the mean of this and Uzkov's result.
Since the error in the final result should decrease as the beam
width decreases, a stringent test of this device is to compare the
result so obtained for three elements with the exact value given
by eqn. (52). The figures are respectively 8-2 and 8-4 db.
Values so obtained are plotted in Fig. 9.