Field
This invention relates generally to an antenna subsystem for a communications satellite and, more particularly, to a cross-link antenna for satellite-to-satellite communications in a constellation, where the cross-link antenna comprises eight quadrifilar helices situated in a ring around an L-band satellite-to-earth antenna, and the quadrifilar helices have a smaller and more effective design which improves both satellite-to-satellite and satellite-to-earth communications performance.
Discussion
Communications satellites are used to enable many different types of telecommunications. For fixed (point-to-point) services, communications satellites provide a microwave radio relay technology which is complementary to that of communication cables. Communications satellites are also used for mobile applications such as communications to ships, vehicles, planes and hand-held terminals, global positioning system (GPS), and for TV and radio broadcasting.
In one common implementation, many communications satellites are placed in low earth orbit (LEO) or medium earth orbit (MEO) in a constellation which circles the earth. The individual satellites in the constellation communicate with each other, and also communicate with users and communications providers on or near the earth's surface. The communications among the satellites in the constellation are handled by what are known as inter-satellite links (ISL) or cross-links.
Some satellite constellations use reflector-type antennas for ISL or cross-link, however these types of antennas and their control systems are expensive and bulky. It is desirable, where possible, to use simpler antennas for cross-link communications. However, the cross-link antennas must not only be effective in satellite-to-satellite communications performance, but must also not be detrimental to satellite-to-earth communications performance. These requirements have been difficult if not impossible to meet using past cross-link antenna designs.
The following discussion of the embodiments of the invention directed to a quadrifilar helical inter-satellite cross-link antenna is merely exemplary in nature, and is in no way intended to limit the invention or its applications or uses. For example, the embodiments discussed below are described in the context of a constellation of global positioning system (GPS) satellites. However, the disclosed antenna may also be suitable for use in other types of satellites or other types of communications systems.
Different types of cross-link antennas have been developed for satellite-to-satellite communications. One type of cross-link antenna uses a reflector to send and receive a highly directional communication signal. Reflector type antennas have good cross-link communications performance, but are bulky and expensive to deploy on a satellite, particularly due to the need to steer the reflector for precise aiming. Another type of cross-link antenna is an omni-directional, non-steerable design which can be much less expensive to construct and deploy.
In the known design employed on the satellite 20, the L-band antenna 50 and the cross-link antenna 60 each consist of multiple sections. The L-band antenna includes a central aperture 52 and an intermediate ring 54. The cross-link antenna 60 includes an inner ring 62 and an outer ring 64. The inner ring 62 includes four quadrifilar helical antennas 70, while the outer ring 64 includes eight of the quadrifilar helical antennas 70. It can be seen in
The L-band antenna 50 transmits a cone-shaped radiation pattern toward earth. The cone is typically required to cover +/−14°, or a 28° opening angle of the cone. Because of the interleaving of the sections of the L-band antenna 50 and the cross-link antenna 60, and the relatively large size of the quadrifilar helical antennas 70, the satellite 20 is known to suffer significant degradation in the L-band signal, especially in coverage areas which are not near the axis of the cone. This L-band signal degradation is due to the physical blockage of the L-band signal by the quadrifilar helical antennas 70. The L-band signal degradation is undesirable, as it either results in poorer GPS receiver performance for users, or requires an increase in the number of satellites in the constellation in order to improve performance.
The antenna 100 is shown in
The coaxial cable/feed wire 110 carries transmission signals from the communications controller to be transmitted by the antenna 100, and carries received signals from the antenna 100 back to the communications controller. The feed wire 110 is split to connect to the four end branches 120, each of which is connected to an end of one of the helical filaments 130 as shown. The feed wire 110 may be split such that one opposing pair of the end branches 120 is coupled to the inner conductor of the coaxial cable, and the other opposing pair of end branches 120 is coupled to the outer shield of the coaxial cable. The ends of the four helical filaments 130 opposite the end branches 120 are coupled to the ground plate 140.
In one preferred embodiment, the quadrifilar helix antenna 100 has a height (in the Z direction—from the ground plate 140 to the end branches 120) of 12″ (inches), and a diameter of 5″. The helical filaments 130 have a pitch angle of 20°, and are made of a wire with a diameter of 0.1″. As stated above, the filaments 130 are shorted to the ground plate 140, which has a diameter of 10″. This embodiment has been designed for optimal performance in a satellite-mounted array of the quadrifilar helical antennas 100 as discussed further below.
Furthermore, the reduced diameter of the antenna 100 causes a change in its radio signal radiation pattern compared to the antenna 70. In the application described above, the cross-link communications between satellites in a constellation are in the UHF band at 260 MHz (megahertz). A 260 MHz signal has a wavelength of approximately one meter. The old design of the antenna 70, with its circumference being close to the one meter wavelength value, operates in an axial or “end-fire” mode, where a radiation pattern 72 emanates predominantly from the open end of the antenna 70. The new design of the antenna 100, with its circumference being much smaller than the one meter wavelength value, operates in an omnidirectional normal mode, where a toroidal radiation pattern 102 produces substantially equal power in all directions perpendicular to the axis of the antenna 100. The toroidal radiation pattern 102 of the antenna 100 not only delivers much more signal power in the 60°-120° elevation angle range where other satellites in the constellation exist, it also delivers almost no signal power toward earth where it is not wanted.
The first thing to notice about the curves on the graph 150 is that they all drop off substantially below about 20° elevation angle (where the 0° elevation angle is straight “down”—toward earth). This is because, as discussed above, the antenna 100 is designed as a normal mode antenna with the toroidal radiation pattern 102. The fact that very little radio signal power emanates from the end of the antenna 100 is expected and is desirable. The quadrifilar helix antenna 100 is designed to have a gain in the normal direction which is at least 40 dBi greater than in the axial direction.
It can also be seen on the graph 150 that antenna performance varies dramatically with helix pitch angle. Specifically, the 10° pitch helix (curve 152) exhibits a large dip in signal gain at an elevation angle of about 110° (from 80°-140°), which overlaps with the visibility window to other satellites in the constellation; this translates to an undesirable reduction in satellite-to-satellite communication performance. Similarly, the 30° pitch helix (curve 156) exhibits a large dip in signal gain at an elevation angle of about 65° (from 20°-120°), which also overlaps with the visibility window to other satellites in the constellation and translates to an undesirable reduction in satellite-to-satellite communication performance.
However, the 20° pitch helix (curve 154) exhibits no dip in signal gain in the elevation angle range of interest. In addition, the 20° pitch helix provides the highest gain of any pitch angle in the 80°-100° elevation angle range of primary importance. Higher pitch angles, such as 40° (curve 158) and higher (not shown) delivered less performance in the 80°-100° elevation angle range. Thus, the 20° pitch helix is chosen as optimal for the design of the quadrifilar helix antenna 100.
The cross-link array 240 includes eight of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100 arranged in a ring surrounding the L-band aperture 230. Only eight of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100 are required on the satellite 200, where twelve of the helix antennas 70 were required on the previous satellite 20. Considering the smaller number of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100, and their smaller size (each antenna 100 has 8× less volume than the antenna 70), it is apparent that the satellite 200 offers over an order of magnitude reduction in cross-link antenna volume, while at the same time providing improved cross-link communications performance.
The eight quadrifilar helix antennas 100 in the cross-link array 240 communicate with a communications controller (not shown) in the hub 220 via coaxial cable, as discussed previously. A simple splitter/combiner can be used to terminate the eight coaxial cables at the controller. Alternatively, in some cases it may be advantageous to provide a separate connection for each of the eight coaxial cables to the controller, where the eight cables could carry transmission signals with different phasing or other differences.
The satellite 200, with the L-band aperture 230 and the cross-link array 240 of eight quadrifilar helix antennas 100, demonstrates superior performance in every way as compared to legacy systems. First, the L-band signal directed toward earth by the satellite 200 suffers less interference than with previous designs, which are known to cause an L-band signal degradation of more than 1.5 dB. In contrast, the L-band signal from the new design of the satellite 200 has negligible degradation. The L-band signal improvements of the satellite 200 are due to three factors—the reduced physical size of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100, the elimination of interleaving between L-band and cross-link arrays, and the reduction of undesirable UHF radiation directed toward earth—all of which are made possible by the new design of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100.
Second, the satellite 200 provides better cross-link communications performance than previous designs, due to the optimization of the toroidal radiation pattern 102 from the quadrifilar helix antennas 100 to deliver the greatest signal strength in the 80-100° elevation angle window where it is needed. Because of the normal mode antenna characteristic and the toroidal radiation pattern 102, fewer of the quadrifilar helix antennas 100 are needed on the satellite 200 than on previous designs. Finally, the cross-link communications performance of the satellite 200 is extremely robust with respect to azimuth angle.
In
The inter-satellite cross-link antenna system described above provides numerous advantages over previous systems. These advantages include smaller and fewer quadrifilar helical antennas for cross-link communications, better cross-link communications performance due to normal mode antenna operation, simpler design of both the L-band and cross-link antenna systems due to elimination of interleaving, and better L-band transmission performance due to less interference from the cross-link antennas. This combination of features enables communication satellites to provide better performance while being made less expensive and less complex—all of which are favorable for telecommunications and other companies which employ communications satellites, and ultimately for the consumer.
The foregoing discussion discloses and describes merely exemplary embodiments of the present invention. One skilled in the art will readily recognize from such discussion and from the accompanying drawings and claims that various changes, modifications and variations can be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as defined in the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5572227 | Pal et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5920292 | O'Neill, Jr. | Jul 1999 | A |
6181286 | Roscoe et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6288686 | Josypenko | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6421028 | Öhgren et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6483471 | Petros | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6535179 | Petros | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6653987 | Lamensdorf et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6806845 | Fund et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
8022890 | Bondyopadhyay | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8681070 | DiNallo et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8836600 | Lafleur | Sep 2014 | B2 |
Entry |
---|
Rao, Basrur Rama, “FRPAs and High-Gain Directional Antennas”, GPS/GNSS Antennas, Chapter 2 , pp. 63-156. |