What's axial ratio and polarization ratio rhcp is acceptable

What's axial ratio and polarization ratio rhcp is acceptable?

I'm working on a truncated corner patch at 2.4 GHz

usually AR should be about 1dB for high performance systems and/or narrowband. In other cases an AR of 3dB might be acceptable (e.g. for very wide band operation and/or cheap systems where fidelity is not as important). using truncated patch you should be able to get AR near 0dB at the center frequency and varies very fast around it.

Thank you for your help

You answer me the firt question
also I need to know the polarization ratio for
predominantly RHCP |ER/EL| I saw that in
https://www.edaboard.com/ftopic116274.html
but i mn't really convinced

regards

you may consider the polarization ratio as the cross-polar component in linearly polarized antennas. The smaller they are the better. I didn't see anyone who mentions this one unless he is sending two channels on the same polarization and he cares a lot for the isolation between them.

Right adel_48
I've got good axial ratio, but the reflection coeficient s11 is bad, and central frecuency is 2.45.
the axial ratio is 1.04 and the s11 in 2.4 GHz is -8.5 dB , Is the reflection coeficient s11 acceptable, isn′t it?

Added after 1 minutes:

I'm new this is my first design

hi,

the reflection being acceptable or not is really a matter of design. Usually for narrowband systems that are not size limited (such as your design). the S11 should be well below -10dB (~-15 : -20). Since you cannot guarantee getting the same results in the measurement.

However, -10dB corresponds to 90% of the incident power is radiated, -8dB => 85% radiated, -3dB => 50% radiated. Thus, for me, as long as I can ensure that the high reflection won't affect the previous stages (e.g. drive the power amplifier out of its stability region) and I am not designing a low power system, I would accept -8dB and maybe even much worse. I will consider it a poor design but it can be used.

best regards,
Adel