1018
4, APRIL 2009
Broadband Matching Limitations for
Higher Order Spherical Modes
M. C. Villalobos, H. D. Foltz, Member, IEEE, and J. S. McLean, Senior Member, IEEE
AbstractThe well-known limits on the radiation of electri-
cally small antennas do not lead to a straightforward, rigorous
computation of wide-band impedance matching limits, especially
when higher order spherical modes are involved and higher
order tuning networks are considered. Fanos formulation of
the wide-band matching of arbitrary impedances does provide a
rigorous solution and has been previously applied to the lowest
order modes. In this paper, we apply Fanos theory to higher
order spherical modes. Graphs of numerical limits on high-pass
and bandpass tuning versus size are presented. It is shown that in
the case where the relative bandwidth is large (multiple octaves),
minimum size requirements are determined primarily by the
return loss requirement and the frequency of the lower band edge;
thus limits on high-pass tuning differ little from those on bandpass
tuning. In the case of antennas required to radiate multiple modes,
bounds on size versus bandwidth can be obtained from the limits
on individual modes, with the highest order mode tending to set
the most restrictive limit.
Index TermsBroadband matching, Fano, fundamental limits,
small antennas.
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE well-known ChuWheeler limits [1], [2] on the radia-
tion of small antennas are rigorous; however, there are
difficulties in applying them to broadband antennas. The rela-
tionships between and achievable impedance bandwidth that
are commonly used in the literature are accurate only when ap-
plied to either narrow-band antennas or second-order systems
(in terms of spherical harmonics, the TM , the TE , and the
even and odd TM and TE modes, exclusively, using Har-
ringtons notation [3]) or to narrow-band antennas. A broadband
antenna will usually not be electrically small at the upper band
edge, and thus we cannot make many of the assumptions that are
common to the theory of small antennas. In particular, the radia-
tion and its associated resonant circuit model are not adequate
for the representation of the behavior of higher order spherical
modes. A more rigorous approach is that of Fano [4], who gave
general limits on broadband impedance matching that apply to
any load impedance that can be represented by a finite number
Manuscript received April 18, 2007; revised August 28, 2008. Current version
published April 08, 2009. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Army
Research Office under Grants W911NF-06-1-0420 and DAAD19-02-1-0008,
the National Science Foundation under Grant 0421352, and the Texas Higher
Education Coordinating Board Advanced Research Program.
M. C. Villalobos and H. D. Foltz are with the University of Texas-Pan Amer-
ican, Edinburg, TX 78539 USA.
J. S. McLean is with TDK R&D Corporation, Cedar Park, TX 78613 USA
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAP.2009.2015793
0018-926X/$25.00 2009 IEEE
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 57, NO.
of linear passive elements. Tighter bounds than those given by
Fano can be obtained when additional restrictions such as finite
order are placed on the matching network, as in the case of filter
design [5]; however, those can be viewed as special cases within
the Fano limits.
The approach we take here is based on Fanos method, ap-
plied to circuit models for the wave impedance of spherical
modes in free space. As shown by Chu [1], the wave impedance
of spherical modes as seen at a spherical boundary can be ex-
actly represented by a finite LC high-pass (series-C shunt-L)
ladder network terminated in a fixed resistance. In [6], it was
shown that computation of radiation based on this circuit
model yields results equivalent to computations based directly
on the field expressions. Further discussion of the equivalent cir-
cuits has been given in [3], [7], and [8], in particular in the use
of the equivalent networks to derive transfer functions.
A comprehensive review of the approach was given by
Yaghjian and Best [9], and further work has been presented by
Geyi [10][12]. Previously, Chu [1] derived numerical results
for limits on attainable return loss for the lowest order spherical
modes using Fanos approach but, as noted in [13], employed
approximations of the modal equivalent circuits. In [2], Wheeler
defined the so-called matching area and applied the concept to
dipolar antennas. Recently, Hujanen et al. [13] and Gustafsson
et al. [14] have found analytical results for the limit in the case
of the lowest order modes. In [13], the approach developed by
Youla [15] was used; however, as noted in [13], this will yield
identical results to the Fano approach. The Fano approach has
also been discussed by Hansen [16] and Lopez [17]. Very re-
cently, Sohl and Gustafsson [18] have described an approach to
fundamental limits on ultra-wide-band antennas based on po-
larizability dyadics and applied it to find lower band limits for
antennas with constant realized gain and antennas with constant
effective aperture.
II. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Given a bounding sphere of radius within which an an-
tenna must be contained, and a frequency band
that must be covered, we wish to find a lower bound on the re-
flection coefficient magnitude. Alternatively, given a frequency
band and a requirement for the maximum acceptable reflection
coefficient magnitude, we wish to find a lower bound on the an-
tenna size.
An important special case is high pass tuning, in which
. The numerical results will show that if two or more octaves
are covered, letting yields bounds on the reflection
coefficient and antenna size that differ little from the case where
is specified (e.g., bandpass tuning).
VILLALOBOS et al.: BROADBAND MATCHING LIMITATIONS FOR HIGHER ORDER SPHERICAL MODES 1019

the known network. In other words, for

can be computed from only the known part of the system, in
this case, the equivalent circuit for a given spherical mode.
The next step is to note that the Taylor coefficients can be
expressed as

Fig. 1. Scenario in which Fanos formulation applies.

(3)
It should be emphasized that the formulation here does not
yield an antenna design, only a boundary on what is physically where the first expression is the standard formula for the Taylor
attainable. This is in part due to the fact that the circuit model coefficient in terms of the derivative and the second is obtained
does not include reactive energy stored within the bounding re- by using Cauchys integral formula for the derivative. The con-
gion, which will tend to further reduce the attainable bandwidth. tour must enclose a region over which the function 1 is
There is no guarantee that a design exists that approaches these analytic. Since can have zeroes in either half of the plane,
limits; in other words, the lower bounds on antenna size found this presents a problem in integrating around either half of the
here may not be greatest lower bounds. complex plane. The problem is resolved by noting that moving
a zero from the right half-plane (RHP) to a mirror image posi-
III. BRIEF SUMMARY OF FANOS RELATIONS tion in the left half-plane (LHP) does not change the magnitude
for real frequencies ; therefore, the relation can be ap-
Fanos analysis applies to the problem of impedance plied to a modified reflection coefficient that is with its RHP
matching to loads that can be represented by any finite number zeroes shifted to the LHP.
of passive, lumped, linear elements. The matching network is The Cauchy integrals, with some manipulation, can be written
restricted to a finite number of passive, lumped, linear, lossless as the Fano relations
elements. The main result of Fanos analysis is that there are
restrictions on the overall reflection coefficient imposed by
(4)
the known part of the network that apply regardless of the
(lossless) matching network that is used, and thus set a limit on
the attainable performance. for , where is the multiplicity of the transmission
The system to be analyzed is divided into two parts as shown zero at zero. The coefficient on the right-hand side is
in Fig. 1. The known part is the given load and the unknown part given by
represents the matching network. The known part, in turn, can
be decomposed into a lossless two-port and a fixed, purely resis- (5)
tive termination , according to Darlingtons theorem [19]. We
are interested in limits on the reflection coefficient looking where
into the matching network from the source side. However, be-
cause the two-port blocks in Fig. 1 are lossless and have the
(6)
same reference impedances, we have

(1) and the are the zeros of , including the effects; the
are the poles of ; and the are the zeros of that lie in
where is the reflection coefficient looking into the known
the right half-plane. The coefficients are the coefficients in
lossless two-port from the resistive termination. The remainder
the Taylor series using the modified reflection coefficient (with
of Fanos analysis is carried out in terms of .
RHP zeroes moved) in place of the actual reflection coefficient.
The return loss in nepers 1 can be expanded in a
Thus the difference between the and coefficients is the
Taylor series in complex frequency . For the special case of
summation in (5), which accounts for the replacement of the
networks with their transmission zeroes at the origin (e.g., high-
zeroes from the RHP to the LHP as described above.
pass type networks), the expansion is taken about the point
Equation (4) defines a set of integral relations that the re-
flection coefficient must obey. The integrands are nonnegative
and can be interpreted as matching areas in the sense that in-
(2)
creased bandwidth or improved return loss is equivalent to in-
creasing the value of the integrals.
where the complex part term is the negative of the phase Initially, the are not known. Therefore, to find the best
of and the log-magnitude of is given by the summation. possible match, the task is to select them so as to optimize the
The even coefficients in the Taylor series are zero. match, within the limits of physical realizability. For physical
The key observation, noted in [4], is that if the known two- realizability, the poles and zeros, including the , must either
port is represented by a ladder network, the initial odd terms be real or in complex conjugate pairs; furthermore, by definition,
in the Taylor series depend only on the elements making up the must have positive real parts.
1020
Fig. 2. Fanos formulation applied to problem of fundamental tuning limits for
arbitrary lossless antennas.
Fig. 3. Ladder network representing transverse-magnetic (TM
mode, for (top) odd n and (bottom) even n.
The system shown in Fig. 1 has identical source and load
impedances for convenience in the formulation; however,
there is no loss of generality because the lossless matching net-
work is arbitrary. It could, for example, contain one or more
ideal transformers. Thus any optimum matching solution ob-
tained for a particular real value of source impedance could be
scaled, in principle, to any other real source impedance. Also,
no complex source impedance could have a
better fundamental matching limit than a purely resistive source
impedance because the complex source could be decomposed
into a resistive source plus a reactive network via Darlingtons
theorem. The reactive network could in turn be absorbed into
the matching network, thus leading to system with a real source
impedance and an equally good match.
IV. APPLICATION TO SPHERICAL MODES
As shown in Fig. 2, the Fano formulation is applied to the
current problem by considering the unknown block to include
the antenna, including transduction from voltage/current at one
port to electromagnetic fields at the other, as well as any added
matching network. The known block is the Chu ladder net-
work, as shown in Fig. 3 for a spherical mode of free space,
which meets the requirements for the Fano formulation to apply.
Thus the limits to be derived apply to an arbitrary lossless an-
tenna, with an arbitrary lossless matching network of unlimited
complexity.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 57, NO. 4, APRIL 2009
For a single spherical mode of any order, the ladder network
has 1 reactive elements, the values of which depend only on
the index and the antenna bounding radius . It is indepen-
dent of the azimuthal index . Each shunt-L or series-C in the
equivalent ladder network introduces a transmission zero at dc,
and thus is equal to the order of the equivalent LC network.
This in turn is one more than the Legendre function order in
a spherical mode TM or TE . For example, for a TM
wave, and in (4).
A. Computation of Coefficients
Although the summations in (5) and (6) are over all the poles
and zeros of the known load and the unknown matching net-
work, the coefficients for will depend only
on the load network, which in this case is the spherical mode or
modes.
As a first example, consider the lowest order transverse mag-
netic spherical mode TM . In this case, the Chu network con-
sists of a single capacitor with and a single inductor
with . Thus and . Since the and
coefficients can be derived from the Chu network alone, the
antenna, matching network, and source should not affect the re-
sult. Therefore, to simplify the calculation of and , we
replace the antenna and source with a simple resistance equal to
the impedance of free space and compute for the resulting
circuit. In terms of complex frequency , the wave impedance
looking back into the network from the free-space side is
) spherical
The reflection coefficient is then
which has no zeros, and two poles located at
From (6), the coefficients are
The same procedure can be extended to higher order modes.
First the impedance is computed as a function of looking back
from the free-space side of the circuit, with the source and an-
tenna replaced by a single resistance equal to the free-space
wave impedance . This is then used to find a rational func-
tion for the reflection coefficient , and the poles and zeroes
are found. Finally, the poles and zeroes are used in (6) to com-
pute the coefficients. Table I shows the coefficients for
the first six spherical modes.
The number of poles for a mode TM will be equal to
, and all will be located in the left half-plane. However, for
modes of index and higher, there may also be zeroes that
may be located in the right half-plane. An example pole-zero
VILLALOBOS et al.: BROADBAND MATCHING LIMITATIONS FOR HIGHER ORDER SPHERICAL MODES 1021

TABLE I
NORMALIZED A COEFFICIENTS FOR SPHERICAL MODES

As stated earlier, are initially unknown and depend on the

Fig. 4. Pole-zero plot for 0 for TM mode, with source and antenna re-
placed by resistance  . The pole (x) and zero (o) locations would change if a
different termination were chosen, but the final result for the coefficients would
not change.
design of the antenna and the matching network. To find a theo-
retical optimum, we need to choose them to optimize the match,
but as discussed earlier, they cannot be chosen completely arbi-
trarily. They must lie in the right half-plane and, if complex, they
must appear in complex conjugate pairs. Furthermore, although
one could choose them to be arbitrarily large or small, values
of zero or infinity will not lead to the best results. For example,
consider the simultaneous (7) and (8) for the TM mode. The
RHP and complex conjugate requirements lead to the summa-
tions being necessarily real and positive. In (7), to maximize
the value for the matching area integral on the left-hand side,
one would want large values for the to minimize the value
of the summation, which is subtracted. On the other hand, in
(8), the summation is added; therefore, one wants small values
of the . This leads one to believe that there are finite optimum
values for the that will lead to the best possible match.

C. Optimum Use of Matching Area

plot for the TM is shown in Fig. 4. The pole and zero locations
would change if a different termination were chosen to replace
the source and antenna, but the final result for the coefficients
would not change.
B. Integral Relations
The integral relationships governing an antenna radiating a
particular spherical mode are obtained by substituting the spe-
cific values for into (4). For example, for the TM
mode, for
Suppose we wish to find the best possible value for the mag-
nitude of the antenna input reflection coefficient ( in Fig. 1)
for a specified band . As discussed earlier,
, so we will use the integral relations for .
To optimize use of the available matching area in each of the
integrals, should have the maximum possible magnitude of
one outside the desired band and be equal to some constant
within the band. When this idealized behavior is assumed, the
integrations in (4) can be performed analytically, with the result
that

(7)

(12)
and for

(8) where

(13)
Similarly, for the TM modes, the procedure described in the
previous section gives coefficients , and for . For a given bandwidth, the problem can
, leading to integral relationships now be stated as an optimization problem: find values for the
in order to maximize , subject to (12).
(9) In the special case of high-pass tuning, (12) can be further
simplified to
(10)

(11)
(14)
1022 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 57, NO. 4, APRIL 2009

Let be the reciprocal of . Then the above

optimization problem can be remodeled in its real form as
follows.
Maximize subject to

Fig. 5. TM mode: minimum feasible value for reflection coefficient versus

electrical size at lower band edge for the case of high-pass tuning.

where for odd and for even. The

purpose of the fourth and fifth constraints is to ensure that the
form complex conjugate pairs if they are complex and have
positive real parts as given by the last constraint.
Since large and small quantities appear in the aforementioned
optimization problem, the problem was scaled to the following
form and solved. Letting and , the
scaled problem becomes as follows.
Maximize subject to

Fig. 6. TM mode: minimum feasible bounding radius versus desired percent

bandwidth for three different cases of specified return loss.

V. NUMERICAL SOLUTION
For the TM mode, an analytical solution can be found.
Because this case has been previously solved (via a different
method) by Hujanen et al. [13], the TM details are given in
the Appendix. Results are shown in Figs. 5 and 6.
For the higher order modes, we have not found analytical so-
lutions, and since the relations in (12) result in equations of the
fifth degree or higher, there is no guarantee that analytical so-
lutions exist. Instead, a numerical optimization approach was
used.
As an example, consider finding in the high-pass case About ten initial points were used for . The
for the TM mode. For a given value of optimization problem was solved using the software CONOPT
, the summation in (12) was taken from to , in conjunction with the NEOS server [20]. From the numer-
where varied from . The value of was ob- ical results, it was observed that for the TM TM , and TM
tained through the following optimization formulation. modes, the minimum value of that solved the problem was
Maximize subject to , the radial index. This result is in agreement with
Fanos conjecture. It should be noted that incrementing from
provided equal or slightly lower numerical values for , and
(15)
for , the optimization problem was infeasible. Numer-
ical results for the higher order mode are shown in Fig. 7.
(16) A. High-Pass Tuning Versus Bandpass Tuning
When the required bandwidth is very large, that is, ,
(17) letting results in little difference in the value obtained
for neper return loss . This is clearly shown for the lowest
plus additional constraints on (18) order TM and TE modes in Figs. 5 and 6. This same point
VILLALOBOS et al.: BROADBAND MATCHING LIMITATIONS FOR HIGHER ORDER SPHERICAL MODES
Fig. 7. TM through TM modes: minimum feasible value for reflection
coefficient versus electrical size at lower band edge for the case of high-pass
tuning.
is also discussed in [13, p. 3237]. Physically, this property stems
from the high-pass nature of the equivalent networks.
This behavior is even more pronounced for the higher order
modes, since the term 1 becomes progressively
smaller for high values of , and the highest value of is the
mode number .
When an antenna is required to have an impedance bandwidth
of an octave or more, the resulting limitations on size versus
reflection coefficient are determined primarily by the lower band
edge. For example, an idealized antenna radiating only a TM
mode and required to have 10 dB return loss over the range
1 to 2 GHz has a minimum bounding sphere radius of about
24.8 mm. If the required range is changed, to 1 to 4 GHz, the
bounding sphere radius is 26.4 mm, and if the range is changed
to 1 GHz to infinity, the radius is 26.9 mm. As another example,
a TM antenna inside a 20 mm sphere, operating from 1 to
2 GHz, has a best case return loss of 5.6 dB. For 1 to 4 GHz, the
return loss is 4.8 dB, and for 1 GHz to infinity, it is 4.5 dB.
VI. MULTIMODE ANTENNAS AND GAIN-BANDWIDTH
RESTRICTIONS
Most practical antennas radiate multiple spherical modes.
The multimode case is substantially more difficult to analyze
by this method, and we do not have a general solution. How-
ever, some useful statements about matching restrictions can
be made. It is important to distinguish between two different
cases, which will be discussed separately.
An antenna that is allowed to radiate any combination of
modes. This would be the case if the radiation pattern and
directivity are not of particular interest.
An antenna that is required to radiate a specified combina-
tion of modes. This would be the case if there is a pattern
or directivity requirement.
A. Antennas Allowed to Radiate Any Combination of Modes
If an antenna is allowed to radiate an unspecified combination
of modes, it is clear that the fundamental limit on bandwidth is
at least as permissive as that of the lowest order mode, since
the lowest order mode has the widest bandwidth for a given
1023
matching tolerance, and one could simply design an antenna to
use that mode alone. It is well known that the radiation as
computed from energy and radiated power is certainly less for
the combination of TE and TM (or other similar modes)
than it is for the TE or the TM mode alone [6], [21]; how-
ever, such a situation cannot be represented by a second order
load network. The relationships between and bandwidth are
typically derived for a second-order load network, even if the
matching network is of arbitrary order. Thus these relationships
cannot be extended to the TE TM case without modification.
B. Antennas Required to Radiate a Specified Combination
of Modes
If an antenna is required to produce a specific directional pat-
tern, or to maintain a gain above that of a short dipole, this in
turn means that the antenna must deliver at least a specified
fraction of its power to higher order modes. The relationship
between gain and mode coefficients is discussed in [3]. In this
case, the achievable bandwidth will be tend to be controlled by
the highest order mode.
The radiated field can be expressed in the form
(19)
where the and are fields for the TE and TM spherical
modes, respectively, with each mode normalized to have unit
radiated power. For power conservation
where is the available source power. Now suppose that to
maintain a desired pattern or gain, power delivered to a partic-
ular mode must satisfy some restriction, for example
for some specified . We will make use of the lower limit
.
The situation can be modeled as shown in Fig. 8, where each
of the modes is represented by its Chu ladder network. In order
to find limits on the power delivered to one particular mode, we
can isolate it by considering the other modes to be part of the
unknown part of the system, together with the antenna and the
matching network. The situation is different from that of Fano
because the unknown block is now lossy rather than lossless.
The case of optimum matching with passive lossy networks has
been analyzed by LaRosa and Carlin [22]. Reference [22, Th.
2] shows that power transfer from the source to the load (in this
case the resistor for the mode of interest) is restricted
by
if and
1024 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 57, NO. 4, APRIL 2009

Then noting that the decade bandwidth required yield results

essentially equal to the high-pass case, and using numerical data
estimated from Fig. 7, one finds the following restrictions at the
lower band edge:

from (27)
from (28)
from (29)

Since all three conditions must be satisfied, the most restrictive

is selected. The bounding radius can then be cal-
culated as 5.3 cm. It should be emphasized that this is a lower
bound on the antenna size but not necessarily a greatest lower
bound. It also should be noted that despite having the lowest
power content, the term was the controlling factor.

VII. CONCLUSION
New results for fundamental limits on the broadband or high-
pass matching of antennas have been presented. In particular,
Fig. 8. Multimode problem. One mode of interest can be isolated by consid- the limitations on the matching of higher order spherical modes,
ering the other modes as absorbed into the unknown antenna/matching network. including those with radial index , have been pre-
sented. The results for the lowest order modes agree
with previously published results [14], [13], and in particular
if , where is the power delivered to the load, the transition from a bandpass to high-pass response predicted
is the available source power, and is subject to the Fano by Hujanen et al. [13]. The numerical results clearly indicate the
restrictions for the lossless case. Although is unspecified, performance trends as related to the radial index. As can be seen
by checking the limiting cases of , and from the numerical results, the spherical modes require an elec-
, one can show that at best the power transfer is trical size that increases successively with radial index in order
limited to to provide the same high-pass cutoff frequency. The results also
lead to definite bounds (although not necessarily tightest pos-
sible bounds) on the size and bandwidth of antennas radiating
specified multiple modes.
We need and therefore

(20) APPENDIX I
ANALYTICAL SOLUTION FOR TM CASE
Since is subject to the limits derived earlier, this requirement The general ideas in this case are similar to that presented
can then be compared to the results to derive an upper bound on in [4, p. 72] for a second-order load. Furthermore, although the
bandwidth for a given size or a lower bound on size for a given approach is different, the result should be essentially equivalent
bandwidth. to that given by Hujanen et al. [13].
As a numerical example, consider a case where an antenna The goal in the TM case is to maximize subject to
is desired to operate over the frequency range GHz
GHz, and radiate as follows:
(30)
(21)
(22)
(23) (31)

with unit available source power. Using the lower bounds on the
First, it should be noted that the summations in (30) and (31)
magnitude in each case, and taking , it can
are real because the are either real or in complex conjugate
be seen from (20) that
pairs. Secondly, the summation in (30) is positive because the
by definition have positive real parts. In order to increase
for (24)
, one would like to make the summation in (30) as small as
for (25) possible but also make the summation in (31) positive and as
for (26) large as possible.
VILLALOBOS et al.: BROADBAND MATCHING LIMITATIONS FOR HIGHER ORDER SPHERICAL MODES 1025

We first find the optimum number of RHP zeroes . Let The conventional formulas for the solution of a cubic equation
; then the complex conjugate property gives are applied, with the result being one real and two complex con-
jugate roots. The real root is identified as the solution for .

(32) REFERENCES
[1] L. J. Chu, Physical limitations of omnidirectional antennas, J. Appl.
Phys., vol. 19, pp. 11631176, Dec. 1948.
(33) [2] H. A. Wheeler, The wide-band matching area for a small antenna,
IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. AP-31, pp. 364367, Mar. 1983.
[3] R. F. Harrington, Time Harmonic Electromagnetic Fields. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1961.
Next, since , it follows that , and therefore [4] R. M. Fano, Theoretical limitations on the broadband matching of
. Thus arbitrary impedances, J. Frank. Inst., vol. 249, pp. 5783, Jan. 1950.
[5] G. Matthaei, L. Young, and E. M. T. Jones, Microwave Filters,
Impedance Matching Networks, and Coupling Structures. Norwood,
MA: Artech House, 1980.
(34) [6] J. S. McLean, A re-examination of the fundamentals limits on the radi-
ation Q of electrically small antennas, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
vol. 44, pp. 672676, May 1996.
Since , we also have [7] H. Thal, Jr., Exact circuit analysis of spherical waves, IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propag., vol. AP-26, pp. 282287, Mar. 1978.
[8] H. Thal, Jr., New radiation Q limits for spherical wire antennas, IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 54, pp. 27572763, Oct. 2006.
(35) [9] A. D. Yaghjian and S. R. Best, Impedance, bandwidth, and Q of an-
tennas, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 53, pp. 12981324, Apr.
2005.
Now combining (32) through (35), the result is that [10] W. Geyi, Physical limitations of antenna, IEEE Trans. Antennas
Propag., vol. 51, pp. 21162123, Aug. 2003.
[11] W. Geyi, A method for the evaluation of small antenna Q, IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 51, pp. 21242129, Aug. 2003.
(36) [12] W. Geyi, P. Jarmuszewski, and Y. Qi, The foster reactance theorem
for antennas and radiation Q, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 48,
pp. 401408, Mar. 2000.
Recalling that we wish to maximize the summation on the left- [13] A. Hujanen, J. Holmberg, and J. C.-E. Sten, Bandwidth limitations
of impedance matched ideal dipoles, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag.,
hand side and minimize that on the right-hand side, it is clear vol. 53, pp. 32363239, Oct. 2005.
that we would like to have the two sides equal. Considering (34), [14] M. Gustafsson and S. Nordebo, Bandwidth, Q factor, and resonance
equality is only possible if all the , so that all the must models of antennas, Progr. Electromagn. Res., vol. 62, pp. 120, 2006.
[15] D. C. Youla, A new theory of broadband matching, IEEE Trans. Cir-
be real and positive. Under these conditions, equality in (36) can cuit Theory, vol. CT-11, pp. 3050, Mar. 1964.
be obtained only if or . But at least one is needed [16] R. C. Hansen, Fano limits on matching bandwidth, IEEE Antennas
for (30) and (31) to form a consistent set of equations. Therefore, Propag. Mag., vol. 47, pp. 8990, Jun. 2005.
[17] A. R. Lopez, Rebuttal to Fano limits on matching bandwidth, IEEE
for any given value of the summation (30), the largest value of Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 47, pp. 128129, Oct. 2005.
the summation in (31) is obtained if . One concludes [18] C. Sohl and M. Gustafsson, A priori estimates of the partial realized
that in the TM case, the optimum choice is a single value that gain of ultra-wideband antennas, Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math., vol. 61,
no. 3, pp. 415430, 2008.
is purely real: . [19] S. Darlington, Synthesis of reactance 4-poles, J. Math. Phys., vol. 18,
Equations (30) and (31) can then be combined to eliminate pp. 275353, Sep. 1939.
, resulting in a single cubic equation for [20] E. D. Dolan, R. Fourer, J. Mor, and T. S. Munson, Optimization on
the NEOS server, SIAM News, vol. 35, pp. 5, 89, 2002.
[21] R. F. Harrington, Effect of antenna size on gain, bandwidth and effi-
(37) ciency, J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand., vol. 64-D, pp. 112, Jan./Feb. 1960.
[22] R. La Rosa and H. J. Carlin, A general theory of wideband matching
with dissipative 4-poles, J. Math. Phys., vol. 33, pp. 331345, 1954.
where

M. C. Villalobos received the B.S. degree in mathematics from the University

of Texas at Austin in 1994 and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in computational
and applied mathematics from William Marsh Rice University, Houston, TX, in
2000.
She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics, University
of Texas-Pan American (UTPA), Edinburg. Her research interests include linear
and nonlinear optimization, applications of optimization, and mathematics ed-
ucation. Prior to arriving at UTPA, she was with St. Marys University and the
University of Texas-El Paso. She is actively involved in mentoring undergrad-
uate students from underrepresented groups onto graduate school. As a result,
she was named UTPA Director of the NSF Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority
Participation program, which is aimed at increasing the number of bachelors
and graduate degrees awarded to women and individuals from underrepresented
groups.
Prof. Villalobos is a 1994 Ford Foundation Predoctoral Fellow.
1026 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 57, NO. 4, APRIL 2009
H. D. Foltz (M85) received the B.S.E.E., M.S.E., and Ph.D. degrees from the
University of Texas at Austin in 1983, 1985, and 1993, respectively.
He is a Professor in the Department of Electrical Engineering, University of
Texas-Pan American, Edinburg. His research interests are in compact, broad-
band antennas; ultra-wide-band antenna characterization; and radio-frequency
circuits.
J. S. McLean (M90SM04) received the B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. degrees in
electrical engineering from the University of Texas at Austin in 1984, 1986, and
1990, respectively.
Previously, he was a Member of Technical Staff with TRW Antenna Sys-
tems Laboratory, Redondo Beach, CA. Since 1998, he has been with TDK R&D
Corporation, Cedar Park, TX, performing research in electromagnetic compat-
ibility and antenna metrology. His technical interests include electrically small
and low-profile antennas. He has carried out research in these areas in the Elec-
trical and Computer Engineering Departments of the University of Wisconsin-
Madison and the University of Texas-Pan American, Edinburg.