3280

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 53, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2005

Broad-Band Fragmented Aperture Phased Array

Element Design Using Genetic Algorithms
Bjrn Thors, Hans Steyskal, Fellow, IEEE, and Henrik Holter

AbstractIn this paper, a synthesis procedure to design thin

broad-band fragmented aperture array elements is described.
The arrays are assumed to be infinite periodic and the elements
consist of a conducting pattern etched on a dielectric backed by
a groundplane. A genetic algorithm (GA) is used to design the
conducting pattern, relative permittivity, and thickness of the
dielectric substrate with respect to array scan and bandwidth
performance. The fitness function in the GA is evaluated using a
finite-difference time-domain code with periodic boundary condi(
wavelength
tions. For a substrate thicker than about 0.1
at the lowest frequency in the frequency band investigated), it was
found that a bandwidth of at least one octave can be obtained for
arrays scanned within 45 from broadside.

Index TermsBroad-band antennas, finite-difference timedomain (FDTD), genetic algorithm (GA), phased arrays.

I. INTRODUCTION

ROAD-BAND array antennas are becoming increasingly

important for military as well as commercial applications.
Sometimes it is claimed that a truly broad-band array can only
be obtained if all the array dimensions are fully exploited.
The interelement spacing is determined by the condition that
no grating lobes appear over the frequency and scan range,
while the size of the total aperture is determined by the desired
directivity. The extension in depth, however, is different for
different types of elements, and presently there is no known
relationship between bandwidth and the minimum depth of the
antenna.
The best known wide-band array elements, the tapered slot
[1], the TEM-horn [2], the bunny-ear antenna [3], and the
body-of-revolution (BOR) element [4], are three-dimensional
elements that use the dimension normal to the aperture plane.
These elements usually have a depth of 0.10.25 , where
is the wavelength at the low end of the frequency band.
Planar, two-dimensional elements offer a simplified geometry and potentially simplified manufacturing and flush, conformal mounting. Due to mutual coupling, dipole arrays can be

Manuscript received September 22, 2004; revised April 14, 2005.

B. Thors was with the Division of Electromagnetic Theory, Royal Institute
of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden. He is now with Ericsson
Research, KI/EAB/TFF, SE 164 80 Stockholm, Sweden (e-mail: bjorn.thors@
ericsson.com).
H. Steyskal was with the Division of Electromagnetic Theory, Royal
Institute of Technology, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden. He is now with the
Air Force Research Laboratory, Hanscom AFB, MA 01730 USA (e-mail:
[email protected]).
H. Holter is with Saab Bofors Dynamics AB, SE-175 88 Stockholm, Sweden
(e-mail: [email protected]).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAP.2005.856340

designed to operate over much larger bandwidths than an individual element. Dense arrays of wire dipoles have been analyzed [5], [6], similar arrays where the dipole arms consist of circular patches [7], [8] and wide crosses [9] have been proposed,
and recently a wide-band dipole array was presented [10]. In
most cases, however, design guide lines and results are scant or
nonexistent. Therefore, this paper explores a design approach
for a planar patch phased array element with octave bandwidth.
Genetic algorithms (GAs) have been used to optimize the
shape of patch elements, both as single elements [11] and as
phased array elements [12]. In [12], the optimization was based
on a GA in combination with a stochastic hill climbing technique and led to a fragmented aperture design. However, most
of the numerical examples given in [12] are for arrays without
a groundplane, which means that the resulting arrays radiate in
two directions. No results are given for groundplane backed arrays scanned off broadside. In this paper, a similar genetic algorithm is used to synthesize a broad-band groundplane backed
fragmented aperture array scanned within 45 from broadside.
This paper focuses on the broad-band properties of the arrays
investigated and not on the optimization method. A detailed description of the GA can be found in [13].
II. GA SYNTHESIS PROCEDURE
A key step in the GA lies in the evaluation of the fitness function. Since we are interested in designing a broad-band array,
it seems reasonable to define a fitness function that minimizes
the standing wave ratio (SWR) over a large frequency range.
This implies that the SWR must be calculated for many frequencies. Furthermore, many geometries will have to be analyzed
during the design procedure which necessitates a fast electromagnetic solver. The problem is simplified by approximating
the large array antenna with an infinite periodic array for which
a unit cell analysis suffices. For the analysis, a finite-difference
time-domain (FDTD) program with periodic boundary conditions is used [14]. The geometry of the unit cell is shown in
Fig. 1.
The design goal is to find a distribution of conducting regions
on the aperture surface, which together with a suitably chosen
permittivity and thickness of the dielectric substrate will produce a well-matched antenna over a large frequency range for
all scan directions. In order to search for the optimum distribution of conducting regions, the unit cell aperture is gridded
into 20 20 pixels where each pixel can be assigned either conducting or nonconducting properties. The element is fed by a
voltage source in the center of the unit cell and the conducting
regions are constrained to be symmetric around the feed point.

0018-926X/$20.00 2005 IEEE

THORS et al.: BROAD-BAND FRAGMENTED APERTURE PHASED ARRAY ELEMENT DESIGN

Fig. 1. Unit cell geometry for a random fragmented aperture array. (a) Side
view and (b) top view.

Thus, only a quadrant of the unit cell will be coded as genes in

the GA.
The quadratic pixels in the 10 10 quadrant are numbered
from 1 to 100. Since only two values are possible for each region
(conducting or nonconducting), a binary coding is practical and
the entire fragmented aperture is described by the first 100 bits in
the chromosomes. If more parameters are included in the design,
such as the relative permittivity and/or the substrate thickness,
the corresponding genes are just added after the first 100 bits in
the chromosomes.
Since the antenna impedance varies with scan direction, the
performance of the antenna elements will be evaluated for three
different scan directions according to Fig. 2.
(reflection coefficient
dB)
In this paper, an SWR
is used as the criterion for a well-matched antenna. Thus, the
and
bandwidth BW is defined as the ratio of the frequencies
between which SWR
for all scan directions.
As mentioned before, the definition of the fitness function has
to reflect the desired properties of the design. In the numerical
simulations in Section III, the sum of the reflected energy for
the three scan directions is minimized over a certain frequency
. Thus, a suitable choice for the fitness
band (design band)
function, which is to be maximized, is
(1)

where
denotes the discrete sample frequencies over the dedenotes the different sample scan directions.
sign band and
Different types of weighting functions have been used in the
. The
simulations, which are represented by the coefficients
must not be made too large since the fitness
design band
function should correspond to a realistic design objective.

III. NUMERICAL RESULTS

The elements are placed in a square grid with an element
cm in the two principal directions. For the
spacing
numerical results in Section III-A and B, the arrays are scanned
and to
in the cardinal planes.
to broadside
The corresponding frequencies where grating lobes will start to
and
GHz, respectively.
propagate are

Fig. 2.

3281

Scan directions used to evaluate the antenna elements.

A. Arrays Without Groundplane

In 1948, Mushiake observed that antennas with a self-complementary structure1 have an input impedance equal to half the
intrinsic impedance of space, independent of the frequency and
the shape of the structure [15], [16]. For array antennas, grating
lobes will eventually appear when the frequency is increased,
which will modify the input impedance and limit the bandwidth.
Moreover, the input impedance will also depend on the scan
angle, which might further reduce the performance of the array.
An example of an approximately self-complementary array of
square patches is shown in Fig. 3(a) [2]. Due to the staircase approximation in standard FDTD, the element is not strictly selfcomplementaryonly 184 of the 400 pixels are conducting.
Array feeding is across the corners of adjacent patches. The active reflection coefficient for this self-complementary array as
computed by our periodic boundary (PB)-FDTD code [14] is
given in Fig. 3(b).
The PB-FDTD code used for the analysis calculates the antenna impedance as a function of frequency. The reflection coefficients shown in Fig. 3(b) were then obtained by relating this
impedance to the characteristic impedance of an imagined transmission line feeding the antenna. The characteristic impedance
used to produce the results in Fig. 3(b) was set to
,
denotes the intrinsic impedance of free space. As
where
expected, for broadside scan, the array is very well matched
for this value of . When the array is scanned in the E- and
H-plane, the antenna impedance is changed (see, e.g., [17]) but
the array is still well matched up to frequencies where grating
lobe effects appear.
This self-complementary element, which has optimal frequency performance at broadside, was based on physical
insight. Therefore, an interesting question is: How does this
design compare with a GA design? Fig. 4 shows results
for an array where the metal distribution was designed to
produce a low reflection coefficient within the design band

GHz.
Apparently the metal distribution obtained is quite different
from the self-complementary geometry in Fig. 3(a). The results
for the reflection coefficients, however, are rather similar compared to the corresponding results for the self-complementary
array. We have been found that different simulations in the end
1The shape of a self-complementary planar antenna is identical to that of its
complementary antenna.

3282

Fig. 3.

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 53, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2005

Self-complementary array. (a) Unit cell geometry and (b) reflection coefficients.

Fig. 4. Design results for an array antenna without a groundplane. (a) Reflection coefficients and (b) unit cell geometry.

usually lead to different geometries but with similar impedance

characteristics. These were all fragmented patches, and in no
case was a single solid patch like in Fig. 3(a) found. In other
words, the search space seems to consist of several local maxima
possible aperture configuraof similar fitness. (There are 2
tions in total.)
B. Arrays With Groundplane
As shown in the previous section, extremely broad-band
array antennas can easily be designed for the case of no supporting groundplane. This is, however, mostly of academic
interest since their bidirectional radiation characteristics limit
their range of applications. For groundplane backed arrays, no
simple broad-band designs are available and more effort (analytical and/or computational) must be invested in the design.

1) Design of Element Configuration and Substrate Permittivity: In this section, a GA is used to design the patch shape
and the dielectric substrate of a groundplane backed fragmented
aperture array. The relative permittivity of the substrate was
allowed to take 16 discrete values in the range 1.14.0, while
the corresponding conductivity always was set equal to zero.
From a broad-band perspective, the largest difference between
groundplane backed arrays and arrays without groundplane is
that the groundplane constitute a bandwidth limiting factor at
low frequencies. At high frequencies the bandwidth is limited,
for both array types, by grating lobe effects. Thus, in an attempt to favor antennas well matched in the center of the design
band, the reflection coefficients were weighted with a half-period of a sine function. The sine function was designed to go to
zero 0.5 GHz outside the bounds of the design band. It was felt

THORS et al.: BROAD-BAND FRAGMENTED APERTURE PHASED ARRAY ELEMENT DESIGN

3283

Fig. 5. Design results for a thin array antenna (d = 6 mm, design B = 2:54:5 GHz, obtained BW= 1:43 : 1). (a) Reflection coefficients and (b) unit cell
geometry.

Fig. 6. Design results for an array antenna with d = 12 mm (design B = 2:05:0 GHz, obtained BW= 1:98 : 1). (a) Reflection coefficients and (b) unit cell
geometry.

that this approach would provide a better indication of achievable bandwidth than trying to force a uniform but, perhaps, poor
match over the entire band. In the previous section, where the
bandwidth was limited only for high frequencies, a uniform
weighting function was used.
Fig. 5 shows results when the metal distribution and the relative permittivity of the substrate were designed for a thin elmm
at center freement (substrate thickness

GHz.
quency) within the frequency band
As expected, the groundplane constitutes a bandwidth limiting factor at low frequencies, and, with the thin substrate considered above, a bandwidth of about 1.43:1 was obtained. As
mentioned before, the performance of the arrays is evaluated

,
for three different scan directions according to Fig. 2 (
,
). In practice, however,
it is often required that the arrays perform well also for intercardinal plane scanning. In Fig. 5(a), numerical results are also
in the diagonal plane
given with the array scanned to
. The diagonal plane is located between the cardinal
planes, and it is therefore not surprising that the dotted curve
in Fig. 5(a) is located between the cardinal plane curves. It
should be emphasized that diagonal plane scanning cannot be
considered as a linear combination of scanning in the cardinal
planes. Nevertheless, based on experience from numerous simulations, arrays that perform well for cardinal plane scanning are
likely to perform well also for diagonal plane scanning for fre-

3284

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 53, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2005

Fig. 7. Design results for an array antenna when the substrate thickness was allowed to take values between 6.028.5 mm. (Design B = 1:55:0 GHz, obtained
BW= 2:23 : 1.) (a) Reflection coefficients and (b) unit cell geometry.

Fig. 8. Design results for an array antenna with element contact restricted. (B = 1:55:0 GHz, d = 16:5 mm, BW= 2:21 : 1). (a) Reflection coefficients and
(b) unit cell geometry.

quencies where no grating lobes can propagate. Thus, the simplification of omitting diagonal plane scanning when evaluating
the array fitness may be justified.
The reflection coefficients presented in this section were
obtained by relating the antenna impedance to a characteristic
impedance of 50 . From a broad-band perspective, however,
this value of
might not be the optimal choice. From now
onwards, the characteristic impedance is allowed to take values
between 20300 . This is accomplished by assuming a set
and computing the
of 281 evenly spaced, fixed values for
corresponding fitness according to (1) for each of these fixed
values. For each element configuration, this leads to a set of
values, from which the
fitness values with corresponding
value is chosen. Thus, the characteristic impedance is
best

not encoded and included in the GA chromosomes. In Fig. 6,

mm ( 0.14 at
results are given for an array with
center frequency).
By increasing the substrate thickness, the impedance match is
improved within the design band, which results in a bandwidth
of practically one octave.
2) Design of Element Configuration, Substrate Permittivity,
and Thickness: All results presented so far in this section have
been obtained for a fixed value of the substrate thickness. One
natural extension is to include this thickness in the fitness function. In Fig. 7, some design results are presented when the substrate thickness was allowed to take 16 discrete values between
6.028.5 mm, 0.0650.31 at center frequency. As expected, by
including the substrate thickness in the GA, a better impedance

THORS et al.: BROAD-BAND FRAGMENTED APERTURE PHASED ARRAY ELEMENT DESIGN

Fig. 9.

3285

Design results for an array antenna with element contact restricted when the substrate thickness was allowed to take values between 6.028.5 mm. (B =

1:55:0 GHz, BW= 2:32 : 1). (a) Reflection coefficients and (b) unit cell geometry.

match was obtained compared to the results obtained previously

.
for fixed values of and the obtained bandwidth BW

IV. EFFECTS OF INTERELEMENT CONTACT

In the literature [12], it has been suggested that electrical contact between adjacent elements sometimes can be advantageous
for the matching properties at low frequencies. This is explained
by noting that the elements are then not electrically confined
within the unit cell. For the designs above, no restrictions regarding electrical contact were placed on the elements and the
GA was left to find the best way to connect the elements and
account for the interelement coupling. By restricting the elements from contacting each other, the possible advantage with
a connected array can be studied. In Fig. 8, results are given for
an array antenna when the outermost part of each unit cell was
forced to be nonconducting. The parameter settings used for the
design were identical to the settings used in Fig. 7, except that
the substrate thickness was fixed to 16.5 mm.
By comparing Fig. 8(a) with Fig. 7(a), it is evident that the
matching properties changed very little by preventing element
contact. Thus, it seems that element contact is not so important
for this type of antenna.
In Fig. 8, the design was made with fixed to 16.5 mm corresponding to the substrate thickness obtained in Fig. 7. Another
interesting question is how an unconnected design will perform
if the substrate thickness is included in the design. This is illustrated in Fig. 9, where it is shown that the substrate thickness
increased to 19.5 mm by allowing the GA to search between
6.028.5 mm. A bandwidth of 2.32:1 was obtained for the new
to higher frequencies.
design as a result of shifting
It is also interesting to note that the bandwidth obtained in
Fig. 9 actually is larger than the bandwidth obtained in Fig. 7.
Since arrays with restricted element contact constitute a subset
of all possible arrays, the GA should in theory be able to find

such a design if it has a higher fitness value, as well as when

element contact is allowed. However, by forcing the outermost
pixels of the unit cell to be nonconducting, the number of possible aperture configurations is reduced by a factor of 2 . Thus,
it seems reasonable that the convergence properties are better
for the unconnected case. All simulations in this paper were run
until no significant improvement in convergence was observed
for a very long time. However, since the GA to a large extent
is based on randomness, there is no guarantee that the obtained
solution is the most optimum solution. This is especially true for
the current problem, where several local maxima of almost the
same fitness exist within the search space. The results in Fig. 9
confirm the conclusion that electrical contact between neighboring elements not necessarily will improve the performance
of the array.
V. COMPUTATIONAL COMMENTS
In contrast to [11], which used a cluster supercomputing platform for designing a single patch element, we designed our
phased array element on a standard 2.26 GHz PC. A typical run
took about 25 h until convergence.
To validate the results obtained by our code PB-FDTD, we
analyzed the broadside scan array in Fig. 6(b) also with the
commercial code CST MICROWAVE STUDIO (CST-MS). A
comparison between the two codes is given in Fig. 10. The
PB-FDTD results were obtained for two different meshes: a
relatively coarse mesh (36 cells/wavelength at 5.5 GHz) corresponding to the mesh used in the GA (where computational
speed is important) and a significantly finer mesh (436 cells/
wavelength at 5.5 GHz) used to obtain convergence. As shown
in Fig. 10, by using a finer mesh, the curve for the reflection
coefficient is shifted upwards in frequency. The general shape
of the curve, however, has not changed much, and we conclude
that the mesh density used for the GA will produce reasonable
results, which can be used to roughly predict the performance

3286

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 53, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2005

Fig. 10. Comparison between PB-FDTD and CST-MS for the array in Fig. 6(b)
scanned to broadside. The coarse mesh corresponds to 36 cells/wavelength at
5.5 GHz while the fine mesh corresponds to 436 cells/wavelength at 5.5 GHz.

of the array. When a GA design has been obtained, a detailed

analysis can easily be made by increasing the number of cells.
As shown in Fig. 10, the agreement between the PB-FDTD
results (fine mesh) and the CST-MS results is quite good. It is
interesting to note that the computational domain had to be discretized into a huge number of cells, both for PB-FDTD and
CST-MS, in order to obtain convergence. This can perhaps be
explained by the rectangular shapes in the fragmented aperture,
where neighboring conducting regions sometimes only are connected at the corners of two pixels. For the lossless case analyzed in this paper, this could result in large current densities
and high reactive power that need to be accurately modeled in
order to obtain convergence.
The possibly large current densities at the corners of two
pixels could perhaps in some cases also give rise to ohmic losses,
which will degrade the performance of the array. In [18], a detailed sensitivity analysis was presented in which one pixel was
added or removed in various locations within each quadrant of
the unit cell. This analysis indicates that a slightly changed electric contact between different regions of the unit cell only will
have a minor effect on the matching properties. Thus, it seems
reasonable to expect that the connections at the corners between
different pixels can be given a finite width if a prototype array
is manufactured in the future.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, a genetic algorithm has been used to synthesize
broad-band fragmented aperture array elements for scan angles
within 45 from broadside. Numerical simulations show that
different designs in the end often lead to different element configurations but with similar impedance characteristics. Thus, the
search space contains several local maxima of similar fitness,
which indicates that the global GA is a suitable tool for this design problem.
In Section III-A, planar arrays without a groundplane were
considered. It was shown that extremely broad-band designs
could easily be obtained that performed well up to frequencies
where grating lobe effects appear. A self-complementary array
element was compared against a GA design, and it was found
that the two elements have similar impedance characteristics although they differ in configuration.

A more challenging and, for practical reasons, more realistic

problem is to consider groundplane backed arrays. The groundplane will constitute another bandwidth limiting factor at low
frequencies in addition to the rapidly changing impedance at
high frequencies due to the onset of grating lobes. As expected,
if the substrate is made too thin (and thus the distance to the
groundplane is made too small), the GA will have problems in
finding an element well matched for all scan directions over a
large frequency band. For a substrate thicker than about 0.1 ,
a bandwidth of at least one octave can be obtained for arrays
scanned within 45 from broadside. The numerical simulations
show that the bandwidth not necessarily increases with an increasing substrate thickness. By including the substrate thickness in the design procedure, a bandwidth of 2.23:1 was ob.
tained with a substrate thickness of
The effect of electrical contact between neighboring elements has been investigated, and it was found to be only of
minor benefit to array performance. This is perhaps not too surprising, since many of the unrestricted optimizations presented
in this paper produced designs without direct conducting paths
between the feed points of the neighboring elements. However,
it is contrary to the conclusions drawn in [12]. Possibly, the
explanation lies in the fact that [12] analyzed mainly arrays
without groundplanes and for broadside scan only.
REFERENCES
[1] H. Holter, T.-H. Chio, and D. H. Schaubert, Elimination of impedance
anomalies in single- and dual-polarized endfire tapered-slot phased arrays, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 122124, Jan.
2000.
[2] D. McGrath, Numerical analysis of TEM horn arrays, in Sensor and
Simulation Notes. Albuquerque, NM: Air Force Research Lab., 1998.
[3] J. J. Lee, S. Livingstone, and R. Koenig, A low-profile wide-band (5:1)
dual-pol array, IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 2, pp. 4649,
2003.
[4] H. Holter, A new type of antenna element for wide-band wide-angle
dual polarized phased array antennas, in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Phased
Array Systems Technology, Boston, MA, Oct. 2003, pp. 393398.
[5] R. C. Hansen, Dipole array scan performance over a wide-band, IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 956957, May 1999.
[6] B. A. Munk, Finite Antenna Arrays and FSS. New York: Wiley, 2003,
ch. 6.
[7] K. Kalbasi, R. Plumb, and R. Pope, An analysis design tool for a broadband dual feed circles array antenna, in Proc. IEEE AP-S Int. Symp.
URSI Radio Science Meeting, Chicago, IL, 1992, pp. 20852088.
[8] J. G. Teti Jr, W. D. Jemison, S. H. Kim, J. E. Laska Jr., and H. M. Halpern,
Wideband airborne early warning (AEW) radar, in Proc. IEEE Nat.
Radar Conf., Apr. 1993, pp. 239244.
[9] B. Prepre and J. Hrault, Conformal broadband phased array antenna, in Proc. 2nd Eur. Workshop Conformal Antennas, The Hague,
The Netherlands, Apr. 2001.
[10] B. A. Munk et al., A low-profile broadband phased array antenna, in
Proc. Antennas Propagation Soc. Int. Symp., Columbus, OH, Jun. 2003,
pp. 448451.
[11] F. J. Villegas, T. Cwik, Y. Rahmat-Samii, and M. Manteghi, A parallel electromagnetic genetic-algorithm optimization (EGO) application
for patch antenna design, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 52, pp.
24242435, 2004.
[12] P. Friedrich, L. Pringle, L. Fountain, P. Harms, G. Smith, J. Maloney,
and M. Kesler, A new class of broadband planar apertures, in Antenna
Application Symp., Allerton Park, IL, Nov. 2001, pp. 561587.
[13] Y. Rahmat-Samii and E. Michielssen, Electromagnetic Optimization by
Genetic Algorithms. New York: Wiley, 1999.
[14] H. Holter, Analysis and design of broadband phased array antennas,
Ph.D. dissertation, Royal Inst. of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden,
2000.
[15] Y. Mushiake, The input impedance of a slit antenna, Joint Conv. Rec.
Tohoku Sections Inst. Elect. Eng. IEICE Jpn., pp. 2526, Jun. 1948.

THORS et al.: BROAD-BAND FRAGMENTED APERTURE PHASED ARRAY ELEMENT DESIGN

[16]

, Self-complementary antennas, IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag.,

vol. 34, pp. 2329, Dec. 1992.
[17] H. A. Wheeler, Simple relations derived from a phased-array antenna
made of an infinite current sheet, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol.
AP-13, no. 4, pp. 506514, Jul. 1965.
[18] B. Thors and H. Steyskal, Synthesis of broadband fragmented aperture
array elements using genetic algorithms, Alfvn Lab., Royal Inst. of
Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, Tech. Rep. TRITA-TET 2004:3, 2004.

Bjrn Thors received the M.Sc. degree in engineering physics from Uppsala University, Sweden, in
1996 and the Ph.D. degree in electromagnetic theory
from the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH),
Stockholm, Sweden, in 2003.
Since 2003, he has been a Research Associate
with KTH. He spent the 2001 to 2002 academic year
with the ElectroScience Laboratory, The Ohio State
University, Columbus, as a Visiting Scholar, working
with development of high-frequency methods for
conformal antennas. From 2003 to 2005, he was
a Research Associate at KTH. He is currently with Ericsson Research,
Stockholm, Sweden, working with human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. His research interests include conformal antennas, scattering,
high-frequency techniques, and broad-band array antennas.

3287

Hans Steyskal (M76SM91F96) received the

Civ. Ing., Tekn. Lic., and Tekn. Dr. degrees in
electrical engineering from the Royal Institute of
Technology (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden in 1963,
1970, and 1973, respectively.
In 1962, he joined the Swedish National Defence
Research Establishment (FOA), where he investigated microwave radiation and scattering problems.
In 1980, he left his position as Chief of the Section
for Field and Circuit Theory, and relocated to the
United States. He is currently with the Air Force
Research Laboratory (AFRL), Hanscom AFB, MA, where he was recently appointed Senior Scientist of Antennas. During 1996 to 2004, he held a part-time
position as an Adjunct Professor in Antenna Technology at KTH. He has been
a Visiting Scientist at the Polytechnic University of New York and The Federal
Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland. His research interests include
electromagnetics, phased array antennas, digital beamforming, and array signal
processing.
Dr. Steyskal is an AFRL Fellow. He has served two terms as Associate Editor
for the IEEE TRANSACTION ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION.

Henrik Holter received the M.Sc.E.E. degree and

the Ph.D. degree in electromagnetic theory from the
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden,
in 1996 and 2000, respectively.
He served in the Swedish Navy from 1986 to
1996, where he attained the rank of Kapten. In
1999, he spent six months at the Antenna Laboratory,
University of Massachusetts, Amherst, participating
in research on tapered slot antenna elements for
phased arrays. He is currently with the Antenna Section at Saab Bofors Dynamics, Stockholm, working
on broad-band array antennas and other types of antennas. He is author of
about 30 journal and conference publications in the areas of broad-band array
antennas and computational electromagnetics for array antennas.
Dr. Holter was named Best Graduate of the Year by the Royal Institute of
Technology in 1996.