DocumentCode
928654
Title
Reply to "Comments on \´Choked Gaussian antenna: extremely low sidelobe compact antenna design\´"
Author
Teniente, Jorge ; Gonzalo, Ramón ; Del-Río, Carlos
Author_Institution
Antenna Group. Electr. & Electron. Eng. Dept., Univ. of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
Volume
2
Issue
1
fYear
2003
fDate
6/25/1905 12:00:00 AM
Firstpage
364
Lastpage
366
Abstract
For original paper see J. Teniente et al., ibid., vol.1, p.200-2 (2002). For comment see C. Granet et al., ibid., p.363-4, (2003). We would like to clarify some aspects considered relevant to the understanding of Gaussian profiled horn antennas (GPHAs). It is important to note that GPHAs are not based on empirical techniques, but on analytical formulas. We would also like to clarify how it was claimed that the choked Gaussian horn is less sensitive to manufacturing errors than the bowl-shaped horn. We agree that each design has its advantages and disadvantages and each application decides which one is better, both of them being excellent candidates as corrugated horn antennas for stringent applications. We also agree that, compared with choked Gaussian horn antennas, the bowl-shaped antenna exhibits better performance for Earth-coverage applications, although suffering from smaller bandwidth and more sensitive fabrication issues.
Keywords
antenna radiation patterns; horn antennas; satellite antennas; Earth-coverage applications; Gaussian profiled horn antennas; bandwidth; bowl-shaped horn; choked Gaussian antennas; corrugated horn antennas; fabrication issues; radiation patterns; space applications antennas; Antenna radiation patterns; Antennas and propagation; Bandwidth; Earth; Fabrication; Frequency; Horn antennas; Manufacturing; Random number generation; Satellites;
fLanguage
English
Journal_Title
Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, IEEE
Publisher
ieee
ISSN
1536-1225
Type
jour
DOI
10.1109/LAWP.2003.820717
Filename
1274896
Link To Document