A Corrugated Printed Dipole Antenna With Equal Beamwidths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A corrugated printed dipole antenna with equal beamwidths in the principal planes is proposed, designed, and evaluated. Orthogonal stubs are added to the dipole arms to equalize its radiation patterns. They also reduce the size of the dipole arms. The antenna is designed to operate at 3 GHz, and has dimension of 36 × 80 × 1.58 mm3. The -10 dB S 11 bandwidth of the antenna is from 2.75 to 3.62 GHz, i.e., 27.3%. The E- and H-plane radiation patterns of the antenna are nearly equal up to 135°from the boresight. To confirm the simulation results, the antenna is fabricated and tested, showing good agreement between simulation and measurement results. Its performance as a feed on a deep reflector, with f/D = 0.25 and D = 45 cm is also studied, where f is the focal length of the reflector and D is its diameter. It provides an enhanced bandwidth of 29.6%, equal E- and H-plane radiation patterns of the reflector, and a gain of 21.4 dBi or an efficiency of 69%. The reflector is only 4.5 λ0 in diameter and would suffer significant blockage losses with conventional waveguide feeds. The proposed feed causes negligible blockage, and provides a respectable efficiency. It is a suitable feed for small symmetric reflectors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".