• Journal of Electronic Science and Technology
  • Vol. 22, Issue 3, 100276 (2024)
254-element array layout synthesized by the MI-FFT technique (blue Ρ denotes turned ON element).
Fig. 1. 254-element array layout synthesized by the MI-FFT technique (blue Ρ denotes turned ON element).
Thinned array pattern obtained by the MI-FFT technique [22]: (a) 3D pattern in (u, v)-plane and (b) two orthogonal cuts of the pattern.
Fig. 2. Thinned array pattern obtained by the MI-FFT technique [22]: (a) 3D pattern in (u, v)-plane and (b) two orthogonal cuts of the pattern.
Results obtained by different methods in a nonuniformly spaced array with length L = 14.5λ: (a) Synthesized patterns and (b) Corresponding excitations.
Fig. 3. Results obtained by different methods in a nonuniformly spaced array with length L = 14.5λ: (a) Synthesized patterns and (b) Corresponding excitations.
Results obtained by different methods in a clustered array (N = 128, d = 0.5λ): (a) Synthesized patterns and (b) half of corresponding excitations.
Fig. 4. Results obtained by different methods in a clustered array (N = 128, d = 0.5λ): (a) Synthesized patterns and (b) half of corresponding excitations.
Initial array settingMax SLL (dB)
Array sizeFilling factor (%)Turned ON elementsRDT [18]HSPSO [12]cGA [15]M-cGA [15]IFTDT [18]MI-FFT [25]
12×124870−16.5−16.717.9−19.4−17.6−19.2
24×2444254−20.7−19.0−22.0−23.3−22.8−23.5
30×3060540−20.1−23.9−24.6−24.3−26.4
Table 1. SLLs obtained by different methods for different size square arrays.
MethodsSLL (dB)D (dBi)dmin (/λ)PT (s)
Chebyshev−30.014.1900.50030
PSO [28]−30.114.1270.586206.82
MPM [33]−29.914.1880.767180.08
BCS [39]−29.314.1900.675200.29
Reweight. L1 [44]−30.014.1970.050212.85
ACO [45]−30.014.0620.600194.52
Table 2. Results of nonuniformly spaced arrays optimized by representative methods (dmin is the realized minimum element spacing, and P denotes the number of optimized elements).
MethodsSLL (dB)FNBW (°)D (dBi)QNminT (s)
Hybrid GA [52]−35.93.419.89154
Hybrid I-CPM [61]−36.33.419.56154100.42
TV-norm [64]−36.53.020.0917413.24
CS [65]−36.53.020.0917312.90
−40.03.419.8725112.22
Table 3. Results of clustered array optimized by representative methods (Q is the number of subarrays, and Nmin denotes the realized minimum number of elements in each subarray).