sensors

Article
Phased Array Antenna Analysis Workflow Applied to Gateways
for LEO Satellite Communications
Irene Merino-Fernandez † , Sunil L. Khemchandani †,∗ , Javier del Pino † and Jose Saiz-Perez †

Institute for Applied Microelectronics, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria (ULPGC), Parque Cientifico
Tecnologico, 35017 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
* Correspondence: [email protected]
† These authors contributed equally to this work.

Abstract: Nowadays, mega-constellations of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites have become increas-
ingly important to provide high-performance Internet access with global coverage. This paper
provides an updated comparison of four of the largest LEO mega-constellations: Telesat, SpaceX,
OneWeb and Amazon. It describes the gateway design workflow from the patch antenna to phased
array analysis. Patch antennas are developed for both transmission and reception after a thorough
examination of the four systems. The results of electromagnetic simulation using Advanced Design
Software (ADS) Momentum are shown, including their radiation pattern. Finally, a model of the
gateway phased array using SystemVue is obtained using hexagonal, circular, and square arrays.
According to the required effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) and gain, the antenna sizes for
the four constellations are estimated. As an example, for SpaceX constellation, a reception antenna
with 8910 radiating elements using a hexagonal distribution with a gain of 46.9 dB and a sensitivity
of −113.1 dBm was obtained.

Citation: Merino-Fernandez, I.; Keywords: gateway; Low Earth Orbit constellations; patch antenna; phased array; satellite
Khemchandani, S.L.; del Pino, J.; communications
Saiz-Perez, J. Phased Array Antenna
Analysis Workflow Applied to
Gateways for LEO Satellite
Communications. Sensors 2022, 22, 1. Introduction
9406. https://doi.org/10.3390/
Low Earth Orbit (LEO) is presented as a complement to 5G communications, improv-
s22239406
ing the bandwidth of mobile communications, giving global coverage, and allowing a wide
Academic Editors: Tiago Varum and range of Internet of Things (IoT) applications or high trust communications. 5G plays a
Joao Nuno Matos key role in the development of high-density sensor networks. The 5G system increase data
Received: 27 October 2022
rates by 10 times that of the traditional Long-Term Evolution networks, to an average of
Accepted: 29 November 2022
10 Gbps with a 1 ms round-trip latency. This high bandwidth can accommodate many
Published: 2 December 2022
connected devices per unit area under the IoT framework [1].
High data rate services are not available in rural places or onboard ships and aircrafts
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
since terrestrial networks do not cover the whole world. SATCOM and SATCOM-on-the
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
move (SOTM) are essential to achieve communications with global coverage. The idea of
published maps and institutional affil-
delivering internet connectivity from space has made a significant resurgence. Although
iations.
some proposals for LEO mega-constellations of satellites emerged in the 90s, it is not until
now that these projects are being implemented. Technical innovations of the past decades,
such as increased performance resulting from the use of digital communication payloads,
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
advanced modulation schemes, multi-beam antennas, and sophisticated frequency re-
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. use schemes, as well as overall cost reductions from advanced manufacturing processes
This article is an open access article and reduced launch costs, have enabled the launch of mega-constellations of low-cost
distributed under the terms and satellites [2].
conditions of the Creative Commons Mega-constellations refer to a constellation composed of hundreds or thousands of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// satellites orbiting the Earth [3]. In particular, LEO refers to orbits between 500 and 1000 km,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ having reduced path loss and delay compared to Geostationary Earth Orbit (GEO), which
4.0/). is located 35,786 km above Earth’s equator [4]. LEO is presented as a complement to

Sensors 2022, 22, 9406. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22239406 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors

Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 2 of 19

5G communications, improving the bandwidth of mobile communications, giving global

coverage and allowing a wide range of Internet of Things (IoT) applications or high trust
communications. This system could also give internet service to remote areas [5].
Figure 1 illustrates a typical satellite communication system. The space segment
consists of the satellites, and the ground segment will be composed of three different types
of elements: the Tracking, Telemetry and Commands (TT&C) stations, the gateways, and
the user terminals. The TT&C stations are responsible for monitoring the satellite in orbit
and will be scarce in number and distributed across the world. The gateways are used
to give users’ terminals access to the Internet through the satellites. Contrary to what
happens with conventional satellite systems, in this type of system a large number of
gateway antennas distributed across the world near or co-located with Internet peering
points are required.

Figure 1. Satellite communications system.

The development of large LEO and Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) constellations, planned
by companies such as SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb and Amazon will require ground terminals
able to track multiple satellites working at Ku-Ka-bands. Parabolic dish antennas have
been the defacto choice for SATCOM Earth antennas. They provide benefits such as high
performance, low power consumption, and low cost. However, they have limitations,
such as weight, size, lower efficiency [6] and its mechanically pointing. To communicate
with LEO satellites, where orbital movement is faster than GEO, the pointing needs to
change quickly.
This is where phased array antennas have emerged as a solution. Relative phases
of signal feeding of the patch antenna are varied to alter the radiation pattern so that the
phased array points in a specific direction electronically without the physical movement of
the antenna. Moreover, dish antennas become inefficient and costly when tens or hundreds
of beams are required, as is the case of current LEO constellations where many tens of
beams per satellite for Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) and hundreds of beams per satellite
for wideband data systems are required [7]. Because of their LEO orbit, these antennas
must scan over very wide angles simultaneously with multiple beams, thus making the
phased arrays the only competitive solution [8].
Array antennas are developed as a key architecture for wireless communication
systems, with Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) antenna arrays included in the
standards for cellular and wireless local area networks. In next-generation High Through-
put Satellite (HTS) communications, these active antenna arrays will play a fundamental
role [6]. Other advantages of this technology are the increase in total power due to the com-
bined effect of the signal from the individual antennas and the improvement in reception
sensitivity due to the higher signal-to-noise ratio resulting from increasing the number of
individual antennas.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 3 of 19

This paper describes a novel workflow based in PathWave System Design (System-
Vue) for modelling and design phased array antennas for LEO satellite communications
gateways. The objective of this work is to study gateway ground station phased arrays for
four constellations of satellites: SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb and Amazon. After a review of
the technical characteristics of these systems, two rectangular patch antennas are designed,
one for transmission and one for reception, and then the number and spatial configuration
of the radiating elements required to provide the service are defined. This paper is struc-
tured as follows: Section 2 reviews the basic theory to understand phased array antennas.
Section 3 gives an overview of the four systems: SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb and Amazon.
Section 4 shows how patch antennas are designed and the results of electromagnetic
simulation for the gateway using Keysight PathWave Advanced Design Software (ADS)
Momentum. Section 5 discusses the modelling of the phased array using SystemVue.
Finally, Section 6 presents the conclusions, summarising the results.

2. Array Theory
A phased array antenna is a computer-controlled antenna array that produces a beam
of radio waves that can be electrically directed in various directions without moving the
antennas [9]. The working principle is based on phase shifting and coherent combining
signals from different antennas in a process called beamforming, as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. One-dimensional phased array diagram.

In the case of a ground station antenna, a two-dimensional phased array is chosen.

These alter pointing angles in terms of elevation θ, or scanning angle, and azimuth φ,
or beam direction. Phase differences are defined by (1) and (2), where ∆Φx is the phase
difference between the array x-axis elements, ∆Φy is the phase difference between y-axis
elements, λ is the wavelength, d x is the distance between x-axis elements and dy is the
distance between y-axis elements [10].

2π
∆Φx = d x senθcosφ (1)
λ
2π
∆Φy = dy senθsenφ (2)
λ
For this type of application, antenna arrays are generally composed of patch antennas
due to their low profile, low cost, light weight and ease of connection to solid state devices.
They consist of a thin metallic layer bonded to a grounded dielectric substrate and can have
any geometric shape such as rectangles or circles [11].
Phased array antennas consist of a large number of radiating elements, in some cases
on the order of thousands of elements, and can be distributed in different geometrical
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 4 of 19

shapes, such as square, circular or hexagonal (see Figure 3). The geometrical distribution of
the patch antennas will determine the radiation pattern of the whole array.

Figure 3. (a) Square. (b) Circular. (c) Hexagonal distribution for phased array antenna design.

To design the antenna, some key parameters should be tackled. First is the radiation
pattern, which is the evaluation of the far-field amplitude for all possible angular positions
of the antenna, and is normalized to the maximum value [9]. Second is the matching
bandwidth of the antenna when connected to the transmitter or receiver, which is measured
by the input impedance or reflection coefficient [9]. This parameter depends on how the
antenna is fed. As shown in Figure 4, there are two methods to feed the patch antenna:
1. Through a microstrip line (see Figure 4a): This method is used when the circuit that
feeds the patch antenna is in the same layer as the antenna. The dimensions of the
microstrip line that feeds the antenna are W f and Y f .
2. Through a point inside the patch antenna itself (see Figure 4b): This method is used
when the circuit that feeds the patch antenna is in a different layer as the antenna.
This point corresponds to (X f , Y f ).

Figure 4. Methods to feed patch antennas: (a) using microstrip, (b) using feeding point.

The last parameter that is analysed is the gain, which is the maximum of the gain
function. The gain function G (θ, ϕ) is the ratio between the power radiated by the antenna
into a direction P(θ, ϕ) and the total accepted power in the same direction by an isotropic
radiator Pin/4π [9], as observed in (3). This function does not consider the impedance
mismatch on the antenna terminals [9].

P(θ, ϕ)
G (θ, ϕ) = (3)
Pin/4π
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 5 of 19

In the case of the gateway phased array with thousands of patch antennas, due to size
restrictions and the high amount of associated circuitry which is placed in a different layer
than the patch antenna, the feed of the patch antenna is usually made by a point inside the
patch antenna itself. The use of circular polarization would complicate its implementation,
adding an extra λ/4 phase shift. This is the reason why this study has been carried out
with linear polarization and feeding through a point inside the patch antenna itself.

3. System Architecture
Today many mega-constellations are already operating, such as Starlink from SpaceX [12],
Lightspeed from Telesat [13] or WorldVu from OneWeb [14]. Recently, Amazon has received
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approval for its satellite mega-constellation project,
Kuiper [15]. Moreover, the Spanish and China governments have started projects: Startical, for
air traffic control by the hand of Enaire [16] and GW from China Satellite Network Group [17].
There are some studies about LEO satellite constellations from SpaceX, Telesat, One-
Web and Amazon. In [2,18] a comparison of the four systems is made from a technical point
of view, estimating the throughput and the number of gateways. In [19] a comparison of
OneWeb and SpaceX systems is conducted, verifying the impact of beam coverage on the
performance of LEO satellite systems.
This section makes a brief study of the four gateway systems for the constellations
SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb and Amazon. They are described according to their FCC filings
as of September 2022, including pending changes.

3.1. SpaceX’s System

The Starlink system of the SpaceX company is close to being operational because it has
several hundreds of its satellites in orbit. Moreover, the beta test has started too in many
countries. This constellation will have 4408 satellites, according to their files of FCC [20–23],
and had its first launch in 2019.
This system has eight technically identical 1.5 m parabolic antennas in each gateway.
These antennas will communicate with satellites visible on the horizon over a minimum el-
evation angle, which is 25 degrees [24]. For gateway communications, this constellation will
use K-band frequencies for: the uplink (27.5–30 GHz), and the downlink (17.8–19.3 GHz) [2].

3.2. Telesat’s System

Lightspeed is the mega-constellation of the Canadian satellite communications com-
pany Telesat. According to FCC filings, it will be developed in two phases: an initial stage,
with 298 satellites, and a second phase, having 1671 satellites [25,26]. It is scheduled to
begin services in 2023 [27], having launched the first satellite in 2018 [28].
Satellites will connect to earth stations with four steerable spot beams with a minimum
elevation of 10 degrees [29]. Their gateways will use K-band in the downlink, from 17.8 GHz
to 20.2 GHz, and from 27.5 GHz to 30 GHz in the uplink [2].

3.3. OneWeb’s System

According to FCC filings, the global communications company OneWeb has planned
to launch the WorldVu constellation of satellites in two phases [30–32], with its first launch
in 2018. The initial phase is composed of 716 satellites, and the second phase is focused
on covering Earth regions with a higher population, adding 5656 satellites to the constella-
tion [18]. The services will start in 2023, due to a pause caused by economic problems [14].
Antennas between 2.4 and 3.5 m will be used in gateway earth stations. Each satellite
will have assigned at least two gateways, and a supplementary antenna for handovers.
They expect to have a minimum of five gateway earth stations in the USA, building
the initial network using existing stations. These stations are also responsible for the
transmission and reception of satellite payload control channels and gateway link power
control. Communication with satellites is only allowed after reaching the elevation angle of
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 6 of 19

15 degrees [31]. The gateway of OneWeb will use the K-band in both uplink (27.5–30 GHz)
and downlink (17.8–19.3 GHz) [2].

3.4. Amazon’s System

In 2019, Amazon announced their LEO mega constellation of satellites Kuiper, having
their filing in an approved state [33]. The set-up of this constellation will be made in
5 phases, launching 3236 satellites. They have not yet launched any satellites, planning
their first launch for the end of 2022.
The elevation of the antennas, which sizes from 1 m to 2.4 m, will be no less than
20 degrees, being unable to access Kuiper’s network below these angles. Each satellite will
have access to two different gateway earth stations, reducing interferences and achieving the
throughput of the system. These gateways will use the K-band in both uplink (27.5–30 GHz)
and downlink (17.7–20.2 GHz) [33].

3.5. Comparative Assessment

Once the constellations’ systems have been described, a comparison is made. The
frequency assignment is shown in Tables 1 and 2 [24,29,31,33], where #CH is the number
of channels and † is for shared frequencies. In the Telesat system, the lower and upper
Ka-band spectrum is shared between the user and the gateway links, the number of beams
and the bandwidth per beam being reconfigurable [2].

Table 1. Summary of the uplink frequency allocation.

Gateway Uplink Links

BWCH #CH BWTOT k
SpaceX 500 8 4000 1
Telesat † † 4200 2
OneWeb 250 16 4000 1
Amazon 50 50 2500 1
MHz - MHz -

Table 2. Summary of the downlink frequency allocation.

Gateway Downlink Links

BWCH #CH BWTOT k
SpaceX 250 9 2250 1
Telesat † † 3600 2
OneWeb 155 16 2480 1
Amazon 100 23 2300 1
MHz - MHz -

Regarding the parabolic antennas, the most important values are summarized in
Table 3. It should be noted that more than one antenna is needed to make an earth station,
so they will be occupying a large surface, considering the diameter and the above ground
level [24,29,31,33]. The values of the effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP), maximum
gain and path distance are taken from [2,33,34]. The minimum value of elevation needed
to communicate with the satellites in LEO is obtained from [24,29,31,33].
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 7 of 19

Table 3. Gateway antennas.

Uplink Antenna Downlink Antenna

Satellite SpaceX Telesat OneWeb Amazon SpaceX Telesat OneWeb Amazon
Diameter (m) 1.5 1.5 3.5 2.4 1.5 1.5 3.5 2.4
Above ground
1.95 3.2 4.55 - 1.95 3.2 4.55 -
level (m)
30.6–
EIRP (dBW) 68.4 75.9 63.2 62.3 39.44 38 36
39
Max Gain
41 31.8 - 53.1 46.9 45.5 51.5 50.2
(dBi)
Elevation
25 10 15 20 25 10 15 20
(deg)
Path distance
2439 1504 1684 590 2439 1504 1684 590
(km)

4. Patch Antenna Design

This section explains the design procedure of the transmission and reception patch
antennas. First, the substrate is selected and then its dimensions are calculated. Finally, the
antenna feeding point is determined.
The most important parameters of the substrate are its dielectric constant (ε r ) and its
thickness (h), which are determined considering the operating frequency ( f ). Later, using
(4)–(7) [35] the length (L) and width (W) of the antenna can be calculated, where Le f f is the
effective length, ∆L is the length extension, and ε e f f is the effective dielectric constant of
the substrate. r
c 2
W= (4)
2 f εr + 1
L = Le f f − 2∆L (5)
c
Le f f = √ (6)
2 f εe f f

(ε e f f + 0.3)( W
h + 0.264)
∆L = 0.412h (7)
(ε e f f − 0.258)( W
h + 0.8)
Next, the feeding point was calculated. In this case, the beamformer chips are placed
in a different layer than the patch antenna. For a large patch antenna array, using this
feeding approach we can reduce the beamforming. To choose our feeding point, the patch
antenna impedance distribution must be considered. As shown in Figure 5, the impedance
is at the maximum at the edges and minimum at the centre. By applying (8) and (9) the
exact position (X f and Y f ) of the 50 Ω impedance point to feed the patch antenna can be
calculated [35,36]. Once this point was calculated, it was adjusted by simulations.

L
Xf = √ (8)
εe f f

W
Yf = (9)
2

4.1. Design of Transmission Patch Antenna

The frequency band of the transmission antenna is centred at 28.75 GHz and ranges
from 27.5 GHz to 30 GHz.Figure 6 shows the ADS substrate model of the six-layer Printed
Circuit Board (PCB) used for electromagnetic (EM) simulations. The top layer (COND2)
is used for the patch antenna, and the bottom layer (COND) is used for the beamforming
circuitry. PC1 and PC2 are the ground planes of the top and bottom layers, respectively, and
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 8 of 19

the dielectric between COND2-PC1 and COND-PC2 is a Taconic TLX-8 fibreglass substrate
with 2.55 relative permittivity (ε r ) and 0.79 mm height. PC1 and PC2 are glued back-to-back
with a 0.1143 mm thickness TPG-32 pre-impregnated material. PCVIA1 and PCVIA2 are
the vias to connect the conductor (COND2 and COND) layers to their respective ground
planes (PC1 and PC2). A third via (HOLE) is needed to connect the antenna with the
beamforming circuitry [37].

Figure 5. Impedance distribution in a patch antenna [36].

Figure 6. ADS model of the selected substrate for the transmission antenna composed of two TLX-8
substrates glued back-to-back with TPG-32 pre-impregnated material.

Using (4)–(9), the patch antenna dimensions were calculated. The results are summar-
ized in Figure 7. The width and length of the antenna are 3.9 mm and 2.5 mm, respect-
ively, and the feeding point for a 50 Ω input impedance is located at X f = 1.6 mm and
Y f = 2 mm.

Figure 7. Transmission antenna layout diagram.

The simulated reflection coefficient (S11 ) is shown in Figure 8a. The reflection coeffi-
cient is better than −10dB over the whole frequency band (from 27.5 GHz to 30 GHz) and
its minimum is located at the centre of the band. As shown in Figure 8b,c, the maximum
gain is 7.5 dB.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 9 of 19

Figure 8. (a) S11 for the transmission patch antenna (b) 3-D transmission antenna radiation pattern
(c) 2-D transmission antenna radiation pattern.

4.2. Design of Reception Patch Antenna

The gateway reception frequency bands for LEO constellations are slightly different:
SpaceX and OneWeb are from 17.8 GHz to 19.3 GHz and are centred at 18.55 GHz, Telesat
is from 17.8 GHz to 20.2 GHz and is centred at 19 GHz while Amazon is from 17.7 GHz to
20.2 GHz and is centred at 18.95 GHz. Since the frequencies are not very different, the same
substrate will be used for all of them. In this case, the chosen substrate was Taconic TLY-5
with ε r =2.2 and h = 1.58 mm. To glue the two layers, the same pre-impregnated material
as for the reception antenna is used (TPG-32). Figure 9 shows the ADS substrate model of
the six-layer PCB used for EM simulations.

Figure 9. ADS model of the selected substrate for the reception antenna composed of two TLY-5
substrates glued back-to-back with TPG-32 pre-impregnated material.

Figure 10 shows a physical representation of the reception antenna. In this case, the
width and length of the antenna are 6.2 mm and 3.8 mm, respectively, and the feeding point
for a 50 Ω input impedance is located X f = 3.1 mm and Y f = 2.6 mm. As the frequencies of
the four considered systems are not very different, there were no major differences between
the results.
In Figure 11a is shown the reflection coefficient, which is below −10 dB over all the
frequency bands selected. The antenna’s radiation pattern is illustrated in Figure 11b,c,
obtaining a maximum gain of 6.2 dB.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 10 of 19

Figure 10. Reception antenna layout diagram.

Figure 11. (a) S11 for the reception patch antenna (b) 3-D reception antenna radiation pattern (c) 2-D
reception antenna radiation pattern.

5. Phased Array Modelling

This section describes how to model a large phased array using SystemVue from the
patch antenna electromagnetic results using Figure 12 workflow.

Figure 12. Workflow to model a large phased array using SystemVue from the patch antenna
electromagnetic simulation.

Once the antennas were designed and EM simulated using PathWave ADS, a file with
the radiation pattern using a python script is obtained. EMPro was used to import, compile
and run a far field simulation from the file with the geometric information of the antenna.
The results were exported to an User-Defined Antenna (.UAN) file containing the gain
pattern, separated in a theta and phi component, with the associated phase information.
This file was imported into SystemVue to simulate a large phased array. For each LEO
constellation, the number of radiating elements were calculated. For transmission, this
number has been calculated as a function of its EIRP, and for reception, as a function of the
required gain.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 11 of 19

5.1. Transmission Phased Array Modelling with SystemVue

The EIRP values specified in Table 3 are the key parameters for estimating the number
of transmission gateway antenna elements. A theoretical calculation of EIRP in dBW can be
conducted using (10), where N is the number of elements of the array, Ge and Γ are the gain
in dBi, and the reflection coefficient of each radiating element, and Pin is the radiofrequency
(RF) power input to each patch antenna, in dBm. This equation does not consider the
electromagnetic interaction between the radiating elements, so we must use Systemvue to
better estimate the gateway EIRP.

EIRP = 10log( N ) + Ge + 10log(1 − |Γ|2 + Pin − 30 (10)

SystemVue schematic for transmission is shown in Figure 13. To simplify the calcu-
lations,it was assumed that the components have no insertion loss. A description of each
component is summarized below:

Figure 13. Transmission phased array model.

• ArrayPort: it defines the operation frequency (Freq) and the input power of the phased
array (TxPwrIn) in dBm. According to (11), TxPwrIn depends on the number of array
elements (N), and the power output of each patch antenna (Ppatch ) in dBm, which we
have assumed to be 20 dBm. For example, for a 2x2 array, is calculated a TxPwrIn of
26 dBm.
TxPwrIn = Ppatch + 10logN (11)

• ArraySplit: it splits equally TxPwrIn power into N radiating elements.

• ArrayAttn: with this weighting attenuator we can achieve low peak sidelobes to
concentrate all gain in the main lobe. In this case, a Taylor weighting was used [38].
• ArrayPhase: this component is used to apply the phase shifts.
• ArrayAnt: this block defines the number of radiation elements and their spatial
distribution. The separation between each element (DistanceX and DistanceY) is 0.55λ.
In this component, the gain pattern of each element was imported using the .UAN file
obtained from EMpro.
SystemVue simulations were run by increasing the number of elements while keeping
simulation time reasonable. From approximately 1K elements, the simulation time was
very long. For this reason, to obtain the EIRP for a large number of radiating elements, the
simulation data were extrapolated and fitted with (12)–(14) in dBW. These Equations are
for circular, hexagonal and square array configurations and they are depicted in Figure 14.
For a circular array, we obtain the same EIRP but with fewer radiating elements compared
to the square and hexagonal configuration. In terms of saving space, the circular array is
the most appropriate.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 12 of 19

Figure 14. EIRP vs. number of radiating elements for transmission obtained with Systemvue.

EIRPcircular = 8.4953ln( N ) − 2.0311 (12)

EIRPhexagonal = 8.5584ln( N ) − 3.5192 (13)

EIRPsquare = 2.6718ln( N ) + 23.464 (14)

Table 4 shows the number of radiating elements for each LEO constellation using
circular configuration. An RF power input of 20 dBm is assumed for each patch antenna.
Theoretical calculations (10) and those obtained through simulations (12) have been in-
cluded. As expected, there is a difference between the results obtained by (10) and (12).
As stated above, this is because, in theoretical calculations, the electromagnetic interaction
between the radiating elements is not taken into account. Considering the logarithmic
relationship between EIRP and N, Telesat needs a huge number of elements. This number
can be reduced by increasing the input power of the signal applied to each patch antenna.

Table 4. Number of radiating elements for transmission using circular configuration. An RF power
input of 20 dBm has been assumed for each patch antenna.

Constellation SpaceX Telesat OneWeb Amazon

Operation
Frequency 28.5 28.5 28.5 28.5
(GHz)
Required EIRP
68.4 75.9 63.2 62.3
(dBW)
Theoretical
Radiant 3008 8318 1928 1738
Elements (10)
SystemVue
Radiant 3969 9689 2128 1976
Elements (12)

A principle of the phased array is that it is electronically steerable by changes on

feeding relative phases and focusing all power on the principal beam. To verify this
principle, elevation angle (Θ) was swept between −45º and 45º for a circular shape-phased
array with 625 elements. As observed in Figure 15, all the power is concentrated on the
principal beam.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 13 of 19

Figure 15. Radiation pattern of the transmission phased array for circular shape configuration and
625 elements.

As already mentioned, one of the advantages of phased arrays over parabolic antennas
is the surface area used. Tables 5 and 6 compares the area of the two solutions, calculated
using Equation (15), where D is the diameter of the antenna, represented in Figure 16.
It should be taken into account that phased array thickness is about a few centimetres,
while parabolic antennas are higher than 1 m.
 2
D
Acircle = π (15)
2

Figure 16. Reference parameters used for calculating the area used in transmission.

Table 5. Area used by parabolic antennas in transmission.

Diameter Area Above Ground Level

LEO Constellation
(m) (m²) (m)
SpaceX 1.5 1.8 1.95
Telesat 1.5 1.8 3.2
OneWeb 3.5 9.6 4.55
Amazon 2.4 4.5 -
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 14 of 19

Table 6. Area used by phased array antennas in transmission.

LEO Constellation Diameter (m) Area (m²)

SpaceX 1.06 0.88
Telesat 1.56 1.92
OneWeb 0.78 0.47
Amazon 0.75 0.44

5.2. Reception Phased Array Modelling with SystemVue

The receiver was simulated using SystemVue to obtain its gain versus the number of
radiating elements. The gain values specified in [31,33,39,40] are the target of this section.
A theoretical calculation of reception gain (Garray ) in dB can be conducted using (16), where
N is the number of radiating elements and Ge and Γ are the gain in dBi, and the reflection
coefficient of each radiating element.

Garray = 10log( N ) + Ge + 10log(1 − |Γ|2 ) (16)

The schematic used to model the receiver using SystemVue is shown in Figure 17.
Most of the components are the same as in the case of transmission except for the RFAMP,
which models the RF frontend. A gain of 60 dB and a Noise Figure (NF) of 1.3 dB is assumed
for the receiver frontend. ArrayAnt component is configured to 19 GHz.

Figure 17. Reception phased array model.

To model the receiver, the sensitivity (S) in dBm for each constellation is calculated
using (17), where EIRPsat is the effective isotropic radiated power of the satellite in dBm,
L TM is the transmission medium loss dB, Ge is the gain of one radiating element in dBi and
FSPL is the free space path loss in dB, described by (18) (in dB), where λ is the wavelength,
and R is the path length in m. In this case, the working frequency is set to 19 GHz in Telesat
and Amazon, and 18.55 GHz in SpaceX and OneWeb. The gain of each radiating element is
6.2 dB. Table 7 shows the sensitivity calculation for each constellation. The OneWeb system
requires the minimum sensitivity (−114 dBm). To ensure the reliability of the system, a
sensitivity of −120 dBm is assumed in the simulations.

S = EIRPsat + FSPL − L TM + Ge (17)

λ 2
FSPL = 10log( ) (18)
4πR
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 15 of 19

Table 7. Sensitivity calculations for each constellation using Equation (17).

Path Distance FSPL Atm Losses Sensitivity

Satellite
(km) (dB) (18) (dB) (dBm) (17)
SpaceX 2439 −185.8 2 −113
Telesat 1684 −182.5 2 −102
OneWeb 1504 −181.6 2 −114
Amazon 590 −173.4 2 −106

As in the case of transmission, due to simulation time constraints, SystemVue sim-

ulations were run approximately to 1K elements. To obtain the gain for a large number
of radiating elements, the simulation data were extrapolated and fitted with (19)–(21) in
dB. These equations are for circular, hexagonal, and square array configurations, and they
are represented in Figure 18. For a hexagonal distribution, we obtain the lower number of
radiated elements for the same gain compared to the circular and square configuration.

Figure 18. Antenna gain vs. number of radiating elements for reception obtained with Systemvue.

Gaincircular = 4.3188ln( N ) + 4.9112 (19)

Gainhexagonal = 4.1123ln( N ) + 9.535 (20)
Gainsquare = 4.2642ln( N ) + 4.646 (21)
Table 8 shows the number of radiating elements for each LEO constellation using
hexagonal configuration modelled using (20). All reception gains are based in FCC filings of
the constellations: SpaceX’s gain is based on [39], Telesat’s gain is based on [40], OneWeb’s
gain is based on [31] and Amazon’s gain is based on [33]. As expected, there is a difference
between the results obtained by (16) and (20). This is because in theoretical calculations,
the electromagnetic interaction between the radiating elements is not taken into account.
In some cases, a huge gain is required, so a large number of elements is needed.
Figure 19 shows the radiation pattern of a 625 elements hexagonal phased array for
different elevation (Θ) angles.
Tables 9 and 10 shows a comparison of the area used by parabolic and phased array
antennas. In this case, as the hexagonal distribution was chosen, the area of the phased
array Ahexagonal was calculated using (22) and Figure 20, where S is the length of the side
of the array and a is the apothem, corresponding to Sarray and a array in the Figure 20,
respectively.
6×S×a
Ahexagonal = (22)
2
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 16 of 19

Table 8. Reception antenna size estimation for hexagonal configuration.

Constellation SpaceX Telesat OneWeb Amazon

Operation
Frequency 18.55 19 18.55 19
(GHz)
Required Gain
46.9 46.5 51.5 50.2
(dB)
Theoretical
Radiant 11,749 8512 33,885 25,119
Elements (16)
SystemVue
Radiant 8910 7956 26,791 19,927
Elements (20)

Figure 19. Radiation pattern of the reception antenna for hexagonal shape configuration, 625 elements
and different elevations.

Table 9. Area used by parabolic antennas in reception.

Diameter Area Above Ground Level

LEO Constellation
(m) (m²) (m)
SpaceX 1.5 1.8 1.95
Telesat 1.5 1.8 3.2
OneWeb 3.5 9.6 4.55
Amazon 2.4 4.5 -

Table 10. Area used by phased array antennas in reception.

LEO Constellation Aphotem (m) Side (m) Area (m²)

SpaceX 0.95 0.85 2.44
Telesat 0.91 0.82 2.22
OneWeb 1.6 1.5 7.6
Amazon 1.4 1.3 5.6
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 17 of 19

Figure 20. Reference parameters used for calculating the area used in reception.

6. Conclusions
LEO satellite mega-constellations are becoming increasingly important for providing
high-performance Internet access with global coverage. The position of the LEO satellites is
constantly changing, and phased array antennas allow orientation to be adjusted without
any physical movement. They also allow multiple satellites to be used simultaneously.
Consequently, the operating costs are greatly reduced compared to conventional parabolic
antennas, as the space requirements are significantly reduced, and the installation and
maintenance costs are also lower [8]. This paper introduces a new workflow for modelling
and designing large phased array antennas for LEO satellite communication gateways.
Phased array antennas from SpaceX, Telesat, OneWeb, and Amazon were developed using
this methodology. Originally, patch antennas were developed for both transmission and
reception. Various phased array configurations were then tested to determine the optimal
physical layout and number of radiating elements. The transmission antenna was modeled
by using a circular distribution, and the reception antenna with a hexagonal distribution.
The specific values are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11. Results’ summary.

Transmission Reception
Number of Sensitivity Number of
EIRP (dBW) Gain (dB)
Elements (dBm) Elements
SpaceX 68.4 4000 −113.1 46.9 8910
Telesat 75.9 9600 −102.5 46.5 7956
OneWeb 63.2 2150 −114.1 51.5 26,791
Amazon 62.3 1950 −106.9 50.2 19,927

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; methodology, I.M.-F.,
S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; formal analysis, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; investigation, I.M.-F., S.L.K.,
J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; writing—original draft preparation, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; writing—review
and editing, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; visualization, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; supervision,
I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; project administration, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P.; funding
acquisition, I.M.-F., S.L.K., J.d.P. and J.S.-P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version
of the manuscript.
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 18 of 19

Funding: This work has been partially supported by Grant PID2021-127712OB-C21 funded by
MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and, by “ERDF a way of making Europe”, the Spanish Ministry
of Science, Innovation and Universities (RTI2018-099189-B-C22) and by Universidad de Las Palmas
de Gran Canaria by the PIFULPGC2020-2 ING-ARQ3 grant.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

LEO Low Earth Orbit

ADS Advanced Design Software
EIRP Effective Isotropic Radiated Power
SOTM SATCOM On The Move
GEO Geostationary Earth Orbit
IoT Internet of Things
TT&C Tracking, Telemetry and Commands
MEO Medium Earth Orbit
MSS Mobile Satellite Services
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
HTS High Throughput Satellite
FCC Federal Communications Commision
EM Electromagnetic
UAN User-Defined Antenna
RF Radiofrequency
NF Noise Figure
PCB Printed Circuit Board

References
1. Zhang Lei, G.Z.; Imran, M.A. Internet of Things and Sensors Networks in 5G Wireless Communications; MDPI: Basel,
Switzerland, 2020.
2. del Portillo Barrios, I.; Cameron, B.; Crawley, E. A technical comparison of three low earth orbit satellite constellation systems to
provide global broadband. Acta Astronaut. 2019, 159, 123–135. [CrossRef]
3. Lacombe, A.K. Mega-Constellations: Technical Aspects. In Promoting Productive Cooperation between Space Lawyers and Engineers;
IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2019; pp. 114–140.
4. ESA—Types of Orbits. Avalaible online: https://www.esa.int/Enabling/Support/Space/Transportation/Types/of/orbits
(accessed on 26 October 2022).
5. Leyva-Mayorga, I.; Soret, B.; Röper, M.; Wübben, D.; Matthiesen, B.; Dekorsy, A.; Popovski, P. LEO Small-Satellite Constellations
for 5G and Beyond-5G Communications. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 184955–184964. [CrossRef]
6. Sikri, D.; Jayasuriya, R.M. Multi-Beam Phased Array with Full Digital Beamforming for SATCOM and 5G. Avalaible online: https:
//www.microwavejournal.com/articles/32053-multi-beam-phased-array-with-full-digital-beamforming-for-satcom-and-5g (ac-
cessed on 1 December 2022).
7. Chiavacci, P. The influence of phased-array antenna systems on LEO satellite constellations. Microwave J. 1999, 42, 282–287.
8. He, G.; Gao, X.; Sun, L.; Zhang, R. A Review of Multibeam Phased Array Antennas as LEO Satellite Constellation Ground Station.
IEEE Access 2021, 9, 147142–147154. [CrossRef]
9. Visser, H.J. Array and Phased Array Antenna Basics; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006.
10. Kymeta Corporation. Link Budget Calculations for a Satellite Link with an Electronically Steerable Antenna Terminal; Kymeta
Corporation: Redmond, WA, USA, 2019.
11. Elliot, R.S. Antenna Theory and Design; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006.
12. Starlink. Avalaible online: https://www.starlink.com/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
13. Telesat. Avalaible online: https://www.telesat.com/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
14. OneWeb. Avalaible online: https://oneweb.net/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
15. Amazon Receives FCC Approval for Project Kuiper Satellite Constellation. Avalaible online: https://www.aboutamazon.com/
news/company-news/amazon-receives-fcc-approval-for-project-kuiper-satellite-constellation (accessed on 26 October 2022).
16. El Gobierno Autoriza la Constitución de la Sociedad “STARTICAL” para la Innovación en la Provisión de Servicios Satelitales
para la Navegación Aérea. Avalaible online: https://www.enaire.es/es/ES/2021/05/18/ndp/proyecto/startical (accessed on
26 October 2022).
17. China Establishes Company to Build Satellite Broadband Megaconstellation—SpaceNews. Avalaible online: https://spacenews.
com/china-establishes-company-to-build-satellite-broadband-megaconstellation/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
Sensors 2022, 22, 9406 19 of 19

18. Pachler, N.; Portillo, I.D.; Crawley, E.; Cameron, B. An Updated Comparison of Four Low Earth Orbit Satellite Constellation
Systems to Provide Global Broadband. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Communications Workshops
(ICC Workshops), Montreal, QC, Canada, 14–23 June 2021; pp. 1–7.
19. Xia, S.; Jiang, Q.; Zou, C.; Li, G. Beam Coverage Comparison of LEO Satellite Systems Based on User Diversification. IEEE Access
2019, 7, 181656–181667. [CrossRef]
20. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SAT-LOA20161115-00118. 2016. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATLOA2016111500118 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
21. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SAT-MOD20181108-00083. 2018. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATMOD2018110800083 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
22. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SAT-MOD20190830-00087. 2019. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATMOD2019083000087 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
23. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SAT-MOD-20200417-00037l. 2020 Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATMOD2020041700037 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
24. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SES-LIC-INTR2019-00882. 2019 Avalaible online: https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-LIC-INTR2019-
00882/1640759.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2022).
25. Telesat Canada. SAT-PDR-20161115-00108. 2016. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/forwardtopublictabaction.
do?file_number=SATPDR2016111500108 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
26. Telesat Canada. SAT-MPL-20200526-00053. 2020. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/forwardtopublictabaction.
do?file_number=SATMPL2020052600053 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
27. Telesat to Redefine Global Broadband Connectivity with Telesat Lightspeed, the World’s Most Advanced Low Earth Orbit (LEO)
Satellite Network. Avalaible online: https://www.telesat.com/press/press-releases/manufacturer-announcement/ (accessed
on 26 October 2022).
28. SSTL’s Space Portfolio—Telesat LEO Phase 1. Avalaible online: https://sstl-qa.azurewebsites.net/space-portfolio/launched-
missions/2010-2020/telesat-leo-phase-1-satellite-launched-2018 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
29. Telesat Canada. SAT-MPL-20200526-00053. 2020. Avalaible online: https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-MPL-20200526-00053/2378320
.pdf (accessed on 26 October 2022).
30. WorldVu Satellites Limited. SAT-LOI-20160428- 00041. 2016. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATLOI2016042800041 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
31. WorldVu Satellites Limited. SAT-MPL-20200526-00062. 2020. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATMPL2020052600062 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
32. WorldVu Satellites Limited. SAT-MPL-20210112-00007. 2021. Avalaible online: http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/
forwardtopublictabaction.do?file_number=SATMPL2021011200007 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
33. Kuiper Systems LLC. SAT-LOA-20190704-00057. 2019. Avalaible online: https://fcc.report/IBFS/SAT-LOA-20190704-00057/177
3885.pdf. (accessed on 26 October 2022).
34. Project Kuiper Announces Plans and Launch Provider for Prototype Satellites. Avalaible online: https://www.aboutamazon.
com/news/innovation-at-amazon/project-kuiper-announces-plans-and-launch-provider-for-prototype-satellites (accessed on
26 October 2022).
35. Jasim, S.E.; Jusoh, M.A.; Mazwir, M.H.; Mahmud, S.N. Finding the best feeding point location of patch antenna using HFSS.
ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2015, 10, 17444–17449.
36. Rishi, R.; Sharma, S. Impedance Matching Techniques for Microstrip Patch Antenna. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2017, 10, 1–16.
[CrossRef]
37. Taconic. Avalaible online: https://www.agc-multimaterial.com/ (accessed on 26 October 2022).
38. Nualart, D. Skorokhod topology. In Encyclopaedia of Mathematics; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2011; pp. 18–19.
39. Space Exploration Holdings, LLC. SES-LIC-INTR2021-04540. 2021. Avalaible online: https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-LIC-INTR202
1-04540/13777500 (accessed on 26 October 2022).
40. Telesat Canada. SES-STA-INTR2019-02310. 2019. Avalaible online: https://fcc.report/IBFS/SES-STA-INTR2019-02310/1704798
(accessed on 26 October 2022).