Pusher and method for pushing a device under test having a single linear polarized antenna into a test socket

Abstract

An embodiment according to the present invention includes a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) for use in an automated test equipment (ATE) to mechanically push a device under test (DUT) (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) including an antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) or an antenna array into a DUT socket (130). The pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) includes a structure (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) having alternating parallel layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) of a relatively higher dielectric permittivity (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) and a relatively lower dielectric permittivity (160b, 260b, 560b). Layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) of higher permittivity (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) and lower permittivity (160b, 260b, 560b) extend in a first direction (170, 270) within ±45° of the push direction (170, 270).

Description

Technology Field

[0001] Embodiments according to the present invention relate to a pusher configured to push a device under test (DUT) into a device under test socket. Embodiments according to the present invention relate to a pusher configured to push a device under test having a single linear polarization antenna(s) into a device under test socket. Further embodiments relate to a test arrangement comprising a device under test to be pushed into a device under test socket (DUT socket) by the pusher. Further embodiments according to the present invention relate to the concept and / or design of a high-transparency pusher for planar antenna modules. Embodiments according to the present invention relate to a high-transparency pusher for over-the-air test sockets. Background Technology

[0002] Millimeter-wave transceiver modules often include electronic devices and planar antennas in a small form factor or a device having a small form factor. The size of the module is often determined by the antenna aperture area or the antenna array aperture area. Such modules are usually desirable (sometimes required) to undergo over-the-air (OTA) testing on automated test equipment (ATE) in or during a production environment. Handling and / or testing the modules may require mechanically pushing the module into the DUT socket by means of a pusher on or toward the antenna or antenna array aperture side.

[0003] The DUT antenna or antenna array is designed to have a layer of air and / or (very) thin dielectric material on top so as not to interfere with the DUT antenna or antenna array. To test the DUT in the ATE or for ATE testing, these conditions are partially mimicked or simulated by a pusher. The pusher, which may be part of the OTA socket and / or part of the handler arm of the ATE or ATE test cell, may be an important part of the OTA test because it comes into contact with the antenna or antenna array while pushing the antenna or antenna array within the DUT or the DUT downward into the DUT socket.

[0004] The problem regarding the material of the pusher for the OTA test socket, or the design of the pusher, is the material of the pusher. It is desirable for the pusher material to have a (very) low dielectric constant close to that of air, or, more broadly, for the electrical properties of the pusher material to be close to those of air. Additionally, the pusher material is desirable to be mechanically strong to withstand the mechanical stress of multiple cycles of pushing the DUT into the DUT socket. In other words, the pusher is desirable to be electromagnetically transparent or nearly transparent to be mechanically robust and rigid while avoiding disturbance of the DUT's single linear polarization antenna(s). Unfortunately, due to physical reasons, there is no available material that possesses all of these characteristics.

[0005] Dielectric materials with (very) low relative permittivity are known to meet the requirements for electromagnetic transparency, but at the same time, these materials are mechanically ductile. Conversely, mechanically rigid pushers are manufactured from high-dielectric-constant materials, which can cause detuning of the antenna feed impedance and / or alter the antenna radiation pattern.

[0006] Therefore, a pusher with optimal performance in terms of not only mechanical rigidity but also electromagnetic transparency is required.

[0007] An embodiment according to the present invention includes a pusher for use in an automated test equipment (ATE) to mechanically push a device under test (DUT), including an antenna or an antenna array, into a DUT socket. The pusher includes a structure having alternating parallel layers having a relatively higher dielectric permittivity and a relatively lower dielectric permittivity. The layers of the higher permittivity and the lower permittivity extend in a first direction within ±45° of the pushing direction.

[0008] To solve the challenge of having a pusher that is mechanically rigid but electromagnetically transparent or nearly transparent, embodiments of the pusher or the structure of the pusher have a hybrid design in which mechanically ductile materials with low dielectric constants and mechanically rigid materials with high dielectric constants are composed and / or mixed. A pusher having such a hybrid design can be applied to push DUTs having single-polarization antennas.

[0009] In other words, the design of the pusher and the dimensions of its high-dielectric constant and / or low-dielectric constant layers may be important or critical to the pusher to avoid influence (or excessive influence) on electromagnetic waves received or transmitted by the DUT antenna or DUT antenna array. High dielectric constant layers improve the mechanical rigidity of the pusher, while low dielectric constant layers improve the electromagnetic transparency of the pusher.

[0010] In addition, the fact that dielectric layers with higher permittivity extend in a direction parallel to the push direction within ±45°, or that the surfaces of the parallel layers are perpendicular to the push direction within ±45°, also improves the stability, durability, and mechanical rigidity of the pusher.

[0011] In a preferred embodiment, the ratio between the thickness of the layers with higher dielectric permittivity and the thickness of the layers with lower dielectric permittivity is 1:10 to 2:1.

[0012] The key requirements for the pusher are mechanical rigidity and electromagnetic transparency. The thicknesses of the layers with higher and lower dielectric permittivity are selected so that the pusher remains mechanically rigid while remaining transparent or nearly transparent to electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna or antenna array of the DUT, allowing it to be used to push the DUT into the DUT socket. Based on previously performed experiments, a ratio of 1:10 to 2:1 satisfies these requirements.

[0013] According to the embodiments, a structure having alternating layers of higher dielectric permittivity and lower dielectric permittivity comprises dielectric regions of relatively higher permittivity of 9 vol.% to 66.6 vol.% or 20 vol.% to 60 vol.% and dielectric regions of relatively lower permittivity of 91 vol.% to 33.3 vol.% or 80 vol.% to 40 vol.%. Preferably, the structure comprises dielectric regions of relatively higher permittivity of 30 vol.% to 50 vol.% and dielectric regions of relatively lower permittivity of 70 vol.% to 50 vol.%.

[0014] A well-chosen ratio between dielectric regions or layers of higher dielectric constant and dielectric regions or layers of lower dielectric constant results in a pusher used to push the DUT into the DUT socket, which is maintained mechanically rigidly while remaining transparent or nearly transparent to electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna or antenna array of the DUT.

[0015] In a preferred embodiment, the surface of a pusher configured to touch a device under test is formed, configured, or processed to avoid the pusher touching or approaching the conductive edge of the antenna of the DUT, for example, within a distance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT. The conductive edge may be a metallic edge of the antenna structure, which strongly contributes to radiation.

[0016] Touching or approaching the DUT antenna with a pusher has an adverse effect on the performance of the DUT antenna. The application of dielectric load to the radiation edges of the DUT antennas or the proximity of those radiation edges affects their resonance. Changing the resonance alters the radiation behavior and feed impedance of the antenna. Furthermore, if the pusher has a dielectric constant that is large relative to the wavelength and not small, it is desirable to avoid any resonances that lead to changes (sometimes fatal changes) in the radiation and feed characteristics within the pusher itself.

[0017] In a preferred embodiment, the pusher includes a spacer configured to be between the structure of alternating parallel layers and the DUT. The spacer is perpendicular to the alternating parallel layers within a tolerance of + / -15° and / or the spacer is parallel to the surface of the DUT to be pushed by the pusher within a tolerance of + / -15°.

[0018] The advantage of spacers is their interchangeability; therefore, in any case, only the spacers need to be replaced rather than the entire pusher. Furthermore, if the pusher needs to be adapted to a new DUT or in the event of failure, only the spacers are replaced, which saves costs and materials.

[0019] In a preferred embodiment, the spacer is a structured spacer, that is, the spacer is additionally formed, configured, or processed to touch the device under test so as not to touch or approach the conductive edge of the antenna of the DUT, for example, within 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT. The conductive edge may be a metallic edge of the antenna structure, which strongly contributes to radiation.

[0020] Since the spacers are interchangeable, each type of antenna design can have a dedicated spacer, which avoids close contact with or approach to the conductive edges of the antenna or antenna array of the DUT. In other words, the same pusher can be applied with different spacers for different DUTs, making the pusher and the consequent ATE more flexible.

[0021] In a preferred embodiment, the spacer has a relative permittivity of 1.5 or less.

[0022] A spacer configured to be in close contact with the DUT antenna without touching or approaching the conductive edges of the antenna is made of a dielectric material with a low relative permittivity so as to be transparent or nearly transparent to electromagnetic waves received or transmitted by the antenna of the DUT.

[0023] In a preferred embodiment, the spacer has a thickness of 50 micrometers to 500 micrometers.

[0024] The spacer is configured to cover the entire surface area of ​​the antenna of the DUT. The aforementioned thickness of 50 micrometers to 500 micrometers helps to achieve this even if the surface area of ​​the antenna is not uniform. In addition, good mechanical stability can be achieved without excessively degrading the antenna capabilities.

[0025] In a preferred embodiment, the spacer has a thickness of 100 micrometers to 200 micrometers.

[0026] If the antenna area of ​​the DUT is slightly (or sufficiently) uniform, a thickness of 100 to 200 micrometers may also be sufficient to cover the entire surface area of ​​the antenna of the DUT.

[0027] In a preferred embodiment, the pusher comprises a dielectric slab that is transverse or perpendicular to the pushing direction within a tolerance of + / -15°, such as a dielectric slab made of a mechanically rigid material having a relatively higher dielectric constant. The dielectric slab is configured to at least mechanically support and / or stabilize layers of the higher dielectric constant.

[0028] Mechanically stronger dielectric slabs are lateral to the push direction and are attached to layers of higher dielectric constant. This prevents independent movement of single layers of higher dielectric constant of the pusher, for example, if the surface of the DUT is not uniform, making the pusher more durable, rigid, and stable.

[0029] In a preferred embodiment, the dielectric slab has a thickness equal to an integer multiple of the half wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT at the center frequency of the operating frequency band of the DUT, for example, within a tolerance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT at the center frequency of the operating frequency band of the DUT, which is calculated as the free-space wavelength divided by the square root of the relative permittivity of the dielectric. The distance between the dielectric slab and the surface of the antenna of the device under test is, for example, at least one wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT at the center frequency band of the operating frequency band of the DUT.

[0030] The dielectric slab is made of a mechanically strong material having a relatively high dielectric constant. It is desirable for the dielectric slab to be as electromagnetically transparent as possible. Therefore, the thickness of the slab and / or the distance between the DUT antenna and the slab is selected in such a way that the negative impact of the slab on electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna is minimized, for example, the loss of electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna is minimized.

[0031] In a preferred embodiment, the length of the alternating parallel layers in the push direction is, for example, 0.5 to 2 times the free space wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT at the center frequency of the operating frequency band of the DUT.

[0032] The length of the alternating parallel layers, that is, the length of the structure of the pusher in the direction of the push, for example, the direction of the main lobe of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna, defines the amount of electromagnetic waves absorbed by the pusher. A pusher with a limited length or alternating parallel layers with a limited length limits the amount of electromagnetic waves absorbed from the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna. Therefore, due to the limited length of the alternating parallel layers, the pusher is maintained mechanically rigid while remaining as transparent as possible to the electromagnetic waves received or transmitted by the DUT antenna.

[0033] In a preferred embodiment, the relatively higher dielectric constant layers have a relative dielectric constant greater than 2, or preferably 2.5 to 4.

[0034] Mechanically strong materials have high relative permittivity. Materials used to provide mechanical stability and strength to pushers have been found to have a relative permittivity of at least 2. A relative permittivity of 2.5 to 4 provides a good balance between mechanical strength and electromagnetic transparency.

[0035] In a preferred embodiment, the layers with relatively higher dielectric constants are made of polymer, polycarbonate, quartz, Teflon, or PEEK material.

[0036] In a preferred embodiment, the relatively lower dielectric permittivity layers have a relative permittivity of 1.5 or less.

[0037] Materials with a relatively lower permittivity of 1.5 are transparent or nearly transparent to electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna of the DUT.

[0038] In a preferred embodiment, layers with a relatively lower dielectric permittivity contain air.

[0039] Air has a low relative permittivity. Therefore, in a simple pusher design, only layers with relatively higher dielectric permittivity are constructed, while layers with relatively lower dielectric permittivity are left as voids, for example, filled with air. In this case, the air surrounding and / or between the layers with relatively higher dielectric permittivity is part of the pusher's structure.

[0040] In a preferred embodiment, the push direction is parallel to the far-field direction of the electric field at the main lobe of the antenna of the DUT with a tolerance of + / -15°. Alternatively, the push direction is perpendicular to the main surface of the DUT within a tolerance of + / -15°. An additional option is that the push direction is perpendicular to the main surface of the DUT socket within a tolerance of + / -15°.

[0041] To improve the transparency of the pusher to electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna, the effective area of ​​the pusher structure, particularly the effective area of ​​the higher dielectric constant layers of the pusher, is minimized. If the orientation of the structure, for example, the extension of the layers is parallel to the main lobe of the received or transmitted electromagnetic waves (in most cases, this is also perpendicular within a tolerance of + / -15° to the main surface of the DUT or DUT socket), the effective area of ​​the structure is minimized.

[0042] Additional embodiments include a test arrangement for testing a device under test. The test arrangement includes a device under test having an antenna or an antenna array, the pusher discussed above, and a socket for the device under test. The device under test having the antenna or an antenna array of the test arrangement is configured to be pushed into the socket for the device under test by the pusher discussed. The antenna of the DUT is a single linearly polarized antenna.

[0043] Another embodiment according to the present invention provides a method for mechanically pushing a device under test, comprising an antenna or an antenna array, into a device under test socket of an automated test equipment. This method includes the step of mechanically pushing the device under test into the device under test socket using the pusher discussed above. The antenna of the DUT is a single linearly polarized antenna.

[0044] It should be noted that the methods and corresponding devices are based on the same considerations. Furthermore, these methods may be supplemented by any of the features or functions and details described herein, either individually or in combination, with respect to the devices. Brief explanation of the drawing

[0045] Next, embodiments according to the present application will be described with reference to the accompanying drawings. FIG. 1 illustrates a schematic representation of an example of a test arrangement including a DUT socket, an example of a DUT having antennas, and an example of a pusher. FIG. 2 illustrates a schematic representation of an embodiment of a pusher configured to repeatedly push DUTs into a DUT socket. FIG. 3 shows a photograph of an example of a test arrangement without a DUT, including a DUT socket and a pusher having a test antenna. Figure 4 illustrates a dielectric constant-strength diagram, where the horizontal coordinate values ​​represent dielectric constant values ​​and the vertical coordinate values ​​represent flexural strength values. FIG. 5a illustrates an initial DUT patch antenna without any pushers. FIG. 5b illustrates a DUT patch antenna having a conventional pusher. Fig. 5c shows a DUT patch antenna having a dielectric slab with a higher permittivity. FIG. 5d illustrates a DUT patch antenna having a pusher structure comprising alternating parallel layers of relatively higher dielectric permittivity and air or relatively lower dielectric permittivity. Figure 5e shows a DUT patch antenna having a dielectric spacer with a lower permittivity. Figure 6a shows a 3D simulation of a DUT with a dual-polarized patch antenna. Figure 6b shows the results of the simulated input reflection coefficient measurements on a diagram and a Smith chart. Figure 7a illustrates a 3D simulation of an arrangement including a patch antenna and a conventional pusher. FIG. 7b shows the radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cut planes for a selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna when the relative permittivity of the pusher is 1.0, and the simulated input reflection coefficient measurement results on the Smith chart and diagram. FIG. 7c shows the radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cut planes for a selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna when the relative permittivity of the pusher is 1.2, and the simulated input reflection coefficient measurement results on the Smith chart and diagram. FIG. 7d shows the radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cut planes for a selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna when the relative permittivity of the pusher is 3.6, and the simulated input reflection coefficient measurement results on the Smith chart and diagram. Figure 8a illustrates a 3D simulation of an arrangement including a patch antenna and a spacer layer. FIG. 8b shows the simulated input reflection coefficient measurement results on a diagram and Smith chart when the relative permittivity of the spacer is 1.3. Figure 9a illustrates 3D simulations of three different test arrangements. FIG. 9b shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the first 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a without a pusher. FIG. 9c shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher is a simplified brick and has a relative permittivity of 1.1. FIG. 9d shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher is a simplified brick and has a relative permittivity of 1.2. FIG. 9e shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher is a simplified brick and has a relative permittivity of 1.3. FIG. 9f shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the third 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher is a layered pusher of 39 slats having a relative permittivity of 1.3. FIG. 9g shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the third 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 9a, where the pusher is a stacked pusher of 39 slats having a relative permittivity of 2.5. Figure 10a illustrates a 3D simulation of a test arrangement. FIG. 10b illustrates the simulated test arrangement of FIG. 10a, which is accumulated layer by layer across three images. FIG. 10c shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the test arrangement of FIG. 10a, comprising a pusher having 39 slats and a structured spacer layer, having relative permittivity of 2.5 and 1.3, respectively. FIG. 10d shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the test arrangement of FIG. 10a, comprising a pusher having 39 slats and a structured spacer layer, having relative permittivity of 3.1 and 1.3, respectively. FIG. 10e shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the test arrangement of FIG. 10a, comprising a pusher having 39 slats and a structured spacer layer, having relative permittivity of 3.6 and 1.3, respectively. FIG. 11a shows two images of the same 3D simulated test arrangement including a DUT with an antenna and a pusher. FIG. 11b shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the test arrangement of FIG. 11a, in which the pusher has 15 slats having structured spacer layers made of materials having relative permittivity of 3.6 and 1.3, respectively. FIG. 12a illustrates a simulated test arrangement, which is the simulated test arrangement of FIG. 11a, in which the pusher has an additional dielectric slab. FIG. 12b shows the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed on the test arrangement of FIG. 12a having a stacked pusher of 15 slats and a structured spacer layer. Figure 13 shows a comparison table for changes in the feed reflection coefficient. Specific details for implementing the invention

[0046] Different embodiments and aspects of the present invention will be described below. Additionally, further embodiments will be defined by the appended claims. It should be noted that any embodiment as defined by the claims may be optionally supplemented by any of the details, features, and functions described herein. Furthermore, the embodiments described herein may be used individually and may also be optionally supplemented by any of the details, features, and functions included in the claims.

[0047] Furthermore, it should be noted that the individual aspects described herein may be used individually or in combination. Accordingly, details may be added to each of the individual aspects without adding details to other aspects. It should also be noted that the present disclosure explicitly or implicitly describes features available for use in automated test equipment, test arrangements, or pushers. Accordingly, any of the features described herein may be used in the context of automated test equipment, test arrangements, or pushers.

[0048] Furthermore, the features and functions disclosed herein in relation to the method may also be used in a device configured to perform such functions. Furthermore, any features and functions disclosed herein in relation to the device may also be used in the corresponding method. In other words, the methods disclosed herein may be complemented by any of the features and functions described for the devices.

[0049] The present invention will be more fully understood from the detailed description given below and from the accompanying drawings of embodiments of the invention, but these are for illustrative and illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiments described.

[0050] Example according to Fig. 1

[0051] FIG. 1 illustrates a schematic representation of an embodiment of a test arrangement (100) for testing a device under test (DUT) (110) comprising one or more antennas (120) and / or antenna arrays (120). The test arrangement (100) includes an embodiment of a DUT socket (130), a DUT (110) having antennas (120), and a pusher (140).

[0052] The test arrangement (100) is configured to test the DUT (110), specifically the antennas (120) of the DUT (110). The DUT (110) is configured to be pushed into the socket (130) of the device to be tested in the push direction (170) by a pusher (140).

[0053] The pusher (140) is a schematic representation of an embodiment comprising a structure (150) comprising alternating parallel layers of a relatively higher dielectric permittivity (160a) and a relatively lower dielectric permittivity (160b), wherein "relatively" means that the permittivity of a given dielectric region is higher or lower than that of other dielectric regions of the pusher (140). The structure (150) and / or the alternating parallel layers of the relatively higher dielectric permittivity (160a) and the relatively lower dielectric permittivity (160b) extend in a direction within + / - 45° of the push direction (170).

[0054] The pusher (140) is configured to mechanically push a device under test (110), including an antenna (120) or an antenna array (120), into a device under test socket (130) of an automated test equipment. The structure (150) of the pusher (140) having alternating parallel layers of a relatively higher dielectric permittivity (160a) and a relatively lower dielectric permittivity (160b) significantly improves the transparency of the pusher (140) compared to conventional pushers, while the pusher (140) remains sufficiently mechanically rigid to repeatedly push DUTs (110) into the DUT socket (130) in a production environment, with respect to electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antennas (120) of the DUT (110).

[0055] The structure (150) comprises dielectric regions (160a) of higher permittivity of 9 vol.% to 66.6 vol.% or 20 vol.% to 60 vol.% and dielectric regions (160b) of lower permittivity of 91 vol.% to 33.3 vol.% or 80 vol.% to 40 vol.%. Preferably, the structure comprises dielectric regions (160a) of higher permittivity of 30 vol.% to 50 vol.% and dielectric regions (160b) of lower permittivity of 70 vol.% to 50 vol.%.

[0056] Layers of relatively higher dielectric permittivity (160a) have, for example, a relative permittivity greater than 2, or preferably 2.5 to 4, such as polymer or polycarbonate or quartz or Teflon or PEEK materials. Layers of relatively lower dielectric permittivity (160b) have, for example, a relative permittivity of 1.5 or less. As shown in FIG. 2, the dielectric region of lower permittivity may also contain air.

[0057] Examples according to FIG. 2

[0058] FIG. 2 illustrates a schematic representation of an embodiment of a pusher (240) similar to the pusher (140) of FIG. 1, having an antenna (220) of the DUT. The pusher comprises a spacer (290), a structure (250) having alternating parallel layers of a relatively higher dielectric permittivity (260a) and a relatively lower dielectric permittivity (260b), and a dielectric slab (280).

[0059] The pusher (240) is configured to repeatedly push DUTs (220) similar to the DUT (110) of FIG. 1 into a DUT socket. The DUTs include at least an antenna (220) or an antenna array that transmits or receives electromagnetic waves (210). The antenna is a single linear polarization antenna.

[0060] The spacer (290) of the pusher is attached to the pusher structure (250) and configured to be midway between the structure (250) and the DUT or the antenna (220) of the DUT. The spacer is perpendicular to the surface of the alternating parallel layers (260a, 260b) of the pusher (240) within a tolerance of + / -15°. The spacer is manufactured from a lower dielectric material that is mechanically ductile and has a relative dielectric constant of less than 1.5. The spacer is configured or processed to avoid the spacer coming close to the conductive edge of the antenna of the DUT or touching or approaching within a distance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (220). The conductive edge may be a metallic edge of the antenna structure, which contributes strongly to radiation.

[0061] The dielectric slab (280) is attached to dielectric pillars (260a) of higher dielectric constant and is arranged laterally or vertically within a tolerance of + / -15° with respect to the push direction (270).

[0062] The dielectric slab (280) of the pusher (240) is configured to mechanically support layers of at least, relatively higher dielectric permittivity (260a) of the structure (250). In order to remain transparent or nearly transparent to electromagnetic waves (210) transmitted or received by the antenna (220), the dielectric slab (280) has a thickness equal to an integer multiple of half the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves (210) in the dielectric material of the dielectric slab (280). This is calculated by dividing the free-space wavelength by the square root of the relative permittivity of the dielectric. The thickness tolerance is, for example, 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (220) at the center frequency of the operating frequency band of the DUT.

[0063] The structure (250) of the pusher is similar to the pusher structure (150) of FIG. 1, wherein the length in the pushing direction of the alternating parallel layers (260a, 260b) is 0.5 to 2 times the free space wavelengths of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (220) of the DUT.

[0064] The pusher (240) can also be used in a test arrangement similar to the test arrangement (100) of FIG. 1. A picture of a test arrangement having a pusher will be found in FIG. 3.

[0065] Example according to Fig. 3

[0066] FIG. 3 illustrates a photograph of an embodiment of a test arrangement (300) similar to the test arrangement (100) of FIG. 1. The test arrangement (300) includes a pusher (340) similar to the pusher (140) of FIG. 1 or the pusher (240) of FIG. 2, and a DUT socket (330). Although the DUT of the test arrangement (300) is not illustrated, FIG. 3 further illustrates a test antenna (350) of an automated test equipment (ATE) configured to perform over-the-air (OTA) tests or measurements on the DUT.

[0067] Dielectric constant-strength diagram according to Fig. 4

[0068] FIG. 4 illustrates a dielectric constant-strength diagram (400), wherein the horizontal coordinate values ​​represent dielectric constant values ​​and the vertical coordinate values ​​represent flexural strength values. Different materials, such as ceramics (450), polymers (452), polymer foams (454), and sandwiches (456) are depicted in this figure. Conventional pusher (or socket) materials (410), ideal pusher materials (430), and available pusher materials (440) are also shown in this figure.

[0069] It is shown that existing pusher (or socket) materials (410) have satisfactory flexural strength, but their dielectric constant is higher than ideal. A satisfactory dielectric constant would be to the left of line (420) or 1.5 or less. Although the location of the ideal material (430) is illustrated in the drawing, no known material exists that matches these requirements. An existing material having a dielectric constant of 1.5 or less is a type of polymer foam having a flexural strength that is 1 / 100 of that of the existing or conventional pusher materials (410). Available materials (440) having a low dielectric constant, illustrated in the diagram, do not have desirable flexural strength.

[0070] For example, an ideal material that meets the characteristics of a low dielectric constant of less than 1.5 and a higher flexural strength exceeding 30 MPa is not yet known, and therefore an improved design concept is required. The design concepts applied to the pusher (240) of FIG. 2 are a combination of all the new ideas or design concepts of FIG. 5.

[0071] Design concept according to Fig. 5

[0072] Figures 5a–5e illustrate schematic representations of existing and new pusher design concepts.

[0073] FIG. 5a illustrates an initial state, such as a patch antenna (500) without any pushers. The patch antenna (500) serves as a characteristic example of a planar antenna. It features two opposing radiating edges (503, 506), and the electric field (509) is mainly perpendicular to these edges. The operating frequency and feed impedance are determined by the resonance of the electromagnetic field (509) surrounding the ground and the patch and the two radiating edges (503, 506).

[0074] That is, FIG. 5a illustrates an initial arrangement of a single patch antenna (500) without any pushers. The antenna radiates or transmits electromagnetic waves (510) that are not preferably affected by pushers in an ideal test arrangement.

[0075] FIG. 5b illustrates the patch antenna (500) of FIG. 5a having a conventional pusher (520) having a conventional design concept, the conventional design concept having the whole or solid block of the pusher (520) configured to push the DUT antenna (500) into the DUT socket. The conventional pusher (520) is manufactured from the material of the conventional pusher material (410) of FIG. 4. In this conventional design, the application of dielectric load to the radiation edges or the proximity of the radiation edges affects the resonance of the DUT antenna (500). The dielectric pusher (520) will change the feed impedance and radiation behavior of the DUT antenna (500) by changing the resonance of the DUT antenna (500). If the pusher has a dielectric constant that is large relative to the wavelength and not small, it is desirable to avoid any resonances within the pusher itself that would eventually lead to significant or sometimes fatal changes in radiation and feed characteristics.

[0076] In order to have a pusher that changes the resonance of the DUT antenna (500) and thereby avoids changing the feed impedance and radiation behavior, three dielectric structural features of the pusher and their specific electromagnetic features are introduced in the following three figures, FIGS. 5c - 5e.

[0077] FIG. 5c illustrates a dielectric slab (580) of a solid, mechanically strong dielectric material with a higher dielectric constant, positioned parallel to the antenna aperture plane of the DUT antenna (500). The thickness of the slab (580) is equal to an integer multiple of the half wavelength of the electromagnetic wave in the dielectric material of the dielectric slab (580), within a tolerance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the DUT antenna (500).

[0078] The distance between the DUT antenna (500) and the dielectric slab (580) is at least one wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the DUT antenna (500). The solid, mechanically strong, higher dielectric material required for mechanical stability is not intended to touch the radiation slots or metallic or conductive edges of the antenna aperture plane, which leads to detuning of the feed impedance. The conductive edge may be the metallic edge of the antenna structure, which contributes strongly to radiation.

[0079] FIG. 5d illustrates a patch antenna (500) having a pusher structure (550) of alternating parallel layers of a relatively higher dielectric permittivity and air or a relatively lower dielectric permittivity. The structure (550), a stack of thin sheets of a higher dielectric material separated by, for example, air or by low dielectric spacer layers, provides a lower effective permittivity for an electric field perpendicular to the sheet plane compared to a higher effective permittivity for an electric field parallel to the sheet plane.

[0080] If the direction of the electric field is known, a stack of thin sheets of a properly oriented structure (550) or a dielectric material (560a) with a higher permittivity can have less effect on the performance of the DUT antenna (500).

[0081] FIG. 5e illustrates a DUT patch antenna (500) having a dielectric spacer (590) of lower permittivity. The DUT having the patch antenna (500) is configured to be pushed into the DUT socket by the spacer (590) or the spacer layer (590).

[0082] The surfaces of planar antennas include, for example, dielectric surface regions, metal edges, and metal surface regions. In terms of touching the surface with a dielectric pusher, the most sensitive regions are the metal edges and the dielectric regions adjacent to them, as these regions can form radiation edges or slots, but the metal surfaces are not very important.

[0083] Some structured dielectric spacers or spacer layers or sheets provide mechanical contact between the planar antenna surface and the pusher only in the metallic regions of the antenna surface and insignificant dielectric regions. It is desirable to leave the radiating edges or slots out of direct contact, thereby providing a small volume of air spacer over these edges or slots.

[0084] While the conceptual ideas of FIGS. 5c and 5e are implemented somewhat clearly and simply, the trade-off between efforts and benefits is further quantified by the idea of ​​FIG. 5d. The design concepts of FIGS. 5a–5e are simulated in the following figures.

[0085] Antenna simulation according to Fig. 6

[0086] FIG. 6a illustrates a 3D simulation of a DUT having a dual-polarized patch antenna, which is a possible example of the patch antenna (500) of FIG. 5. An exemplary antenna (600) is used in FIG. 6 to quantify performance in the simulation using electromagnetic field simulation software. The exemplary antenna (600) is a dual-linear polarized microstrip patch antenna. This is representative of most planar antennas, as their behavior and problems are common to all patch and slot antennas.

[0087] In the simulation, a center operating frequency of 28 GHz is used. The two feed lines are terminated at the ports with a characteristic line impedance of approximately 35 ohms.

[0088] FIG. 6b plots the simulated input reflection coefficient measurement results as a frequency-reflection diagram (630) and on a Smith chart (660). The charts show the input reflection coefficients. The markers correspond to approximately (40.9+j1.0)Ω at 28 GHz.

[0089] Simulation of a conventional pusher according to Fig. 7

[0090] FIG. 7a illustrates a 3D simulation of an arrangement comprising a patch antenna (710) of a DUT similar to the patch antenna (600) of FIG. 6, and a conventional solid dielectric pusher (720) configured to mechanically push the main surface of the DUT or DUT antenna into the DUT socket, which is also illustrated in the design concept of FIG. 5b.

[0091] FIGS. 7b–7d illustrate the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the arrangement of FIG. 7a using different pushers, for example, the pushers have different relative permittivity. In the simulations, a center operating frequency of 28 GHz is used. Two feed lines are terminated at the ports with a characteristic line impedance of about 35 ohms.

[0092] FIG. 7b illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the first case of FIG. 7a, where the pusher is made of a material having a relative permittivity of 1.0, such as air or vacuum. This is equivalent to the fact that the pusher is absent. For example, it should be noted that the results presented in FIG. 6b for the antenna of the device under test in the air are slightly different, because for accurate comparison, the size of the computational domain in FIG. 7b is kept the same as or within that of all simulations including the pusher. That is, in order to compare the measurements in FIG. 7b–7d, the computational domain includes the pusher, whereas in the results presented in FIG. 6b, it does not.

[0093] FIG. 7b illustrates the input reflection coefficient measurement results of a simulation in which the pusher (720) is manufactured from a material having the same relative permittivity of 1 as that without the pusher. The simulation takes into account the dimensions of the pusher, and therefore the simulated measurement results are slightly different from the simulated measurement results presented in the diagram (630) and Smith chart (660) of FIG. 6.

[0094] The simulated measurement results of the input reflection coefficient are shown in diagram (732) and Smith chart (734). The markers are at approximately -24.2 dB and (42.3+j1.2)Ω at 28 GHz (0.0615 exp(+j 13.7°)).

[0095] Radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cutting planes for one selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna are shown in diagrams (736, 738).

[0096] The radial pattern results for the first cutting plane are as follows:

[0097] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0098] Main lobe size: 7.12 dBi,

[0099] Main lobe direction: 3.0 degrees,

[0100] Angle width (3 dB): 86.1 degrees, and

[0101] Side Lobe Level: -17.8 dB.

[0102] The radiation pattern results for the second cutting plane are as follows:

[0103] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0104] Main lobe size: 7.11 dBi,

[0105] Main lobe direction: 1.0 degrees,

[0106] Angle width (3dB): 78.4 degrees,

[0107] Side Lobe Level: -17.7 dB.

[0108] FIG. 7c illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second case of FIG. 7a, in which the pusher (720) is made of a material having a relative permittivity of 1.2, e.g., a dielectric foam material. Similar to the first case, the results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (742) and Smith chart (744). The markers are at approximately -18.4 dB and (35.4 - j8.5) Ω at 28 GHz (0.120 exp(+j 262.6°)).

[0109] Radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cutting planes for one selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna are shown in charts (746, 748).

[0110] The radial pattern results for the first cutting plane are as follows:

[0111] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0112] Main lobe size: 7.42 dBi,

[0113] Main lobe direction: 3.0 degrees,

[0114] Angle width (3 dB): 84 degrees, and

[0115] Side Lobe Level: -16.4 dB.

[0116] The radiation pattern results for the second cutting plane are as follows:

[0117] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0118] Main lobe size: 7.41 dBi,

[0119] Main lobe direction: 1.0 degrees,

[0120] Angle width (3dB): 77.2 degrees,

[0121] Side lobe level: -16.5 dB.

[0122] FIG. 7d illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the third case of FIG. 7a, in which the pusher (720) is made of a material having a relative permittivity of 3.6, which may be a PEEK (Polyetheretherketon) material. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (752) and Smith chart (754). The markers are at approximately -8.1 dB and (16.55 - j3.9) Ω at 28 GHz (0.394 exp(+j 194.6°)).

[0123] Radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cutting planes for one selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna are shown in charts (756, 758).

[0124] The radial pattern results for the first cutting plane are as follows:

[0125] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0126] Main lobe size: 6.8 dB,

[0127] Main lobe direction: 28.0 degrees,

[0128] Angle width (3 dB): 104.4 degrees, and

[0129] Side Lobe Level: -8dB.

[0130] The radiation pattern results for the second cutting plane are as follows:

[0131] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0132] Main lobe size: 6.08 dB,

[0133] Main lobe direction: 6.0 degrees,

[0134] Angle width (3dB): 81.6 degrees,

[0135] Side Lobe Level: -10.2 dB.

[0136] To summarize the design concept used by conventional pushers (720), the simulated measurement results of FIG. 7b are compared with the simulated measurement results of FIG. 7c and FIG. 7d.

[0137] Comparing the first and second cases, or the simulated measurement results of Fig. 7b and Fig. 7c, the feed reflection coefficient changed by 0.153 in the complex plane, the gain increased from 7.1 dBi to 7.4 dBi, and the beam width decreased from 86° to 84° (E-plane) and from 78° to 77° (H-plane), respectively. Such fluctuations, and the consequent effect of the pusher, are clearly acceptable. However, a material with a relative permittivity of 1.2 is not mechanically stiff enough.

[0138] Comparing the first and third cases—specifically the simulated measurement results of Fig. 7b—with the simulated measurement results of Fig. 7d, the feed reflection coefficient shifted by 0.455 in the complex plane, the gain increased from 7.1 dBi to 6.8 dBi, and the width changed from 86° to 104° (E-plane) and from 78° to 82° (H-plane), respectively. Such fluctuations in the pusher and the resulting effects are too high, for example, unacceptable.

[0139] The simulated measurement results of the conventional pusher shown in FIG. 7a, as shown in FIG. 7b–7d, are proof that additional design concepts or a combination thereof are required.

[0140] Simulation of the spacer according to Fig. 8

[0141] FIG. 8 illustrates a 3D simulation of a patch antenna (810) similar to the patch antenna (600) of FIG. 6 and a spacer (830) configured to push the DUT into the DUT socket. The simulated spacer (830) is a low-dielectric spacer having a relative permittivity of 1.3 and a total thickness of 300 micrometers. The spacer is considered to be in contact with the antenna surface. Additionally, the spacer provides trenches or cutouts (air filter) of a depth of, for example, 150 micrometers along the radiation edges or slots, having a trench width of, for example, 300 micrometers.

[0142] The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are shown in the diagram (840) and Smith chart (850). The markers are at approximately -22.2 dB and (38.47 - j5.8) Ω at 28 GHz (0.0077 exp(+j 283.5°)).

[0143] Structural design simulation according to Fig. 9

[0144] FIG. 9a illustrates 3D simulations of three different test arrangements. The first 3D simulation of test arrangement (910) is an initial exemplary antenna (940) similar to the exemplary antenna (600) of FIG. 6, which is a possible example of the patch antenna (500) of FIG. 5. The initial exemplary antenna (940) is a dual linear polarized antenna or a patch antenna. The exemplary antenna (940) is used to quantify performance in the simulation using electromagnetic field simulation software in the following second and third 3D simulated test arrangements.

[0145] A second 3D simulated test arrangement (920) includes an initial exemplary antenna (940) having a homogeneous dielectric pusher (950). The pusher (950) may be seen as a single block or as a simplified brick only.

[0146] A third 3D simulated test arrangement (930) includes an initial exemplary antenna (940) having a pusher (960) having a structure of alternating layers or a stacked pusher (960) made of dielectric slats. In this example, the pusher has 39 slats, each having a thickness of 50 µm, and has a gap of 100 µm between adjacent slats.

[0147] FIG. 9b illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the first 3D simulated test arrangement (910) of FIG. 9a, without a pusher. This is equivalent to the second test arrangement (920) of FIG. 9a, which has a pusher (950) made of a material that is a simplified brick and has a relative permittivity of 1.0. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (912) and Smith chart (914). The markers are at approximately -24.2 dB and (40.9 - j1.05) Ω at 28 GHz (0.045 exp(+j 343°)).

[0148] FIG. 9c illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement (920) of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher (950) is a simplified brick and made of a material having a relative permittivity of 1.1. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (922) and Smith chart (924). The markers are at approximately -21.6 dB and (36.0 - j 5.92) Ω at 28 GHz (0.083 exp(+j 260°)).

[0149] FIG. 9d illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement (920) of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher (950) is a simplified brick and made of a material having a relative permittivity of 1.2. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (926) and Smith chart (928). The markers are at approximately -16.55 dB and (31.22 - j8.11)Ω at 28 GHz (0.149 exp(+j 239°)).

[0150] Similar to FIG. 9d, FIG. 9e illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the second 3D simulated test arrangement (920) of FIG. 9a, where the pusher (950) is a simplified brick and is made of a material having a relative permittivity of 1.3. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (942) and Smith chart (944). The markers are at approximately -13.72 dB and (27.24 - j8.67) Ω at 28 GHz (0.206 exp(+j 228°)).

[0151] FIGS. 9f and 9g illustrate the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the third 3D simulated test arrangement (930) of FIG. 9a, in which the pusher (950) is a stacked pusher of 39 slats made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3 and 2.5. Each slat has a thickness of 50 µm, while the distance between two adjacent slats is 100 µm. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented in diagrams (962, 966) and Smith charts (964, 968), respectively.

[0152] Note that while the simulated measurement results of FIGS. 9b–9e, such as measurements performed for test arrangements without a pusher or a simplified brick pusher, do not show differences between the different polarizations of the exemplary antenna, the measurement results of FIGS. 9f–9g show that the stacked pusher affects the two vertical polarizations differently, for example, that fields parallel to the slats (first polarization or port 1 feed) are disturbed by the stacked pusher as much as fields perpendicular to the slats. That is, the curve and / or marker for port 1 is different from the curve and / or marker for port 2.

[0153] The marker for Port 1 in Fig. 9f is at approximately -22.9 dB and (36.84 - j 5.32) Ω at 28 GHz (0.072 exp (+j 266°)). The marker for Port 2 in Fig. 9f is at approximately -21.5 dB and (36.14 - j 6.08) Ω at 28 GHz (0.085 exp (+j 261°)).

[0154] The marker for port 1 in Fig. 9g is at approximately -13.9 dB and (27.66 - j8.88)Ω at 28 GHz (0.202 exp(+j 320°)). The marker for port 2 in Fig. 9g is at approximately -10.8 dB and (22.18 - j8.16)Ω at 28 GHz (0.289 exp(+j 216°)).

[0155] Structural design simulation according to Fig. 10

[0156] FIG. 10a illustrates a 3D simulated test arrangement (1000) comprising a DUT (1020) having an antenna and a pusher (1010). The pusher is a stacked pusher comprising a low dielectric constant structured spacer layer (1013) made of a material having a relative dielectric constant of 1.3, combined with a structure of alternating layers (1016). In this example, the structure (1016) has 39 dielectric slats, wherein the slats have a thickness of 50 μm and the distance or gap between two adjacent slats is 100 μm. In this simulation, the material of the slats has a variable dielectric constant, for example, measurements performed on different pushers made of different slat materials can be simulated.

[0157] To make it more visible, the test arrangement (1000) is illustrated or constructed layer by layer in FIG. 10b. The first image illustrates a DUT (1020) having an antenna that is a dual-polarized patch antenna similar to the antenna (600) in FIG. 6a. The second image illustrates a DUT (1020) having a low dielectric constant spacer layer (1013) of a pusher (1010). The third image illustrates a 3D simulated test arrangement (1000) including a pusher (1010) and a DUT (1020) having a structured spacer layer (1013) and alternating layers (1016).

[0158] FIG. 10c illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed on the 3D simulated test arrangement (1000) of FIG. 10a, where the pusher (1010) is a stacked pusher of 39 slats having a structured spacer layer (1013). The structured spacer layer (1013) and the slats are made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3 and 2.5, respectively. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on the diagram (1033) and the Smith chart (1036).

[0159] The marker for Port 1 in Fig. 10c is at approximately -17.9 dB and (30.4 - j4.9)Ω at 28 GHz (0.127 exp(+j 218.6°)). The marker for Port 2 in Fig. 10c is at approximately -13.9 dB and (25.5 - j4.1)Ω at 28 GHz (0.201 exp(+j 202.5°)).

[0160] FIG. 10d illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed on the 3D simulated test arrangement (1000) of FIG. 10a, in which the pusher (1010) is a pusher composed of a layer of 39 slats having a structured spacer layer (1013). The structured spacer layer (1013) and the slats are made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3 and 3.1, respectively. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on the diagram (1043) and the Smith chart (1046).

[0161] The marker for Port 1 in Fig. 10d is at approximately -17.5 dB and (29.6 - j4.2)Ω at 28 GHz (0.133 exp(+j 211.2°)). The marker for Port 2 in Fig. 10d is at approximately -12.3 dB and (23.1 - j2.2)Ω at 28 GHz (0.242 exp(+j 190.9°)).

[0162] FIG. 10e illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed on the 3D simulated test arrangement (1000) of FIG. 10a, in which the pusher (1010) is a pusher composed of a layer of 39 slats having a structured spacer layer (1013). The structured spacer layer (1013) and the slats are made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3 and 3.6, respectively. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on the diagram (1053) and the Smith chart (1056).

[0163] The marker for port 1 in Fig. 10e is at approximately -17.5 dB and (29.6 - j3.5)Ω at 28 GHz (0.134 exp(+j 206°)). The marker for port 2 in Fig. 10e is at approximately -11.5 dB and (21.7 - j0.7)Ω at 28 GHz (0.267 exp(+j 183°)).

[0164] The simulated measurement results show that the stacked pusher (1010) affects the two vertical polarizations differently, for example, that the fields parallel to the slats (first polarization or port 1 feed) are disturbed by the stacked pusher as much as the fields perpendicular to the slats.

[0165] Structural design simulation according to Fig. 11

[0166] FIG. 11a illustrates two images of the same 3D simulated test arrangement (1100) including a DUT (1150) having an antenna and a pusher (1110). The first image focuses on the test arrangement (1100), while the second image focuses on the slats (1140) of the pusher (1110). The pusher (1110) is a stacked pusher (1110) comprising a low dielectric constant structured spacer layer (1130) made of a material having a relative dielectric constant of 1.3, combined with a structure of alternating layers (1120) or slats (1140) separated by air gaps. In this simulation model or example, the structure (1120) has 15 dielectric slats (1140), where the slats (1140) have a thickness of 100 μm and adjacent slats (1140) are separated by an air gap of 300 μm. The slats (1140) are made of a material having a relative permittivity of 3.6.

[0167] Although the material of the low dielectric constant spacer (1130) or the spacer layer (1130) is somewhat ductile, the spacer layer (1130) helps to disperse pressure. Thus, the density of the layers or slats (1140) of the stacked pusher (1110) can be (somewhat) reduced, which reduces the disturbance of the feed reflection coefficient. This is also recognizable when comparing the simulated measurement results of FIGS. 10 and FIGS. 11.

[0168] FIG. 11b illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the 3D simulated test arrangement (1100) of FIG. 11a, in which the pusher (1110) is a stacked pusher of 15 slats (1140) having a structured spacer layer (1130). The structured spacer layer (1130) and the slats (1140) are made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3 and 3.6, respectively. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on the diagram (1163) and the Smith chart (1166).

[0169] The stacking pusher (1110) affects the two vertical polarizations differently, for example, fields parallel to the slats (1140) (first polarization or port 1 feed) are disturbed less by the stacking pusher (1110) than fields perpendicular to the slats (1140).

[0170] The marker for Port 1 in Fig. 11b is at approximately -19.2 dB and (31.1 - j4.0)Ω at 28 GHz (0.110 exp(+j 215.6°)). The marker for Port 2 in Fig. 11b is at approximately -12.7 dB and (23.7 - j2.5)Ω at 28 GHz (0.231 exp(+j 192.6°)).

[0171] Structural design simulation according to Fig. 12

[0172] FIG. 12a illustrates a simulated test arrangement (1200) similar to the simulated test arrangement (1100) of FIG. 11, wherein the pusher (1210) has an additional dielectric slab (1260). That is, the simulated test arrangement (1200) includes a DUT (1250) having an antenna and a pusher (1210). The pusher (1210) is a stacked pusher (1210) comprising a structure of alternating layers (1220) and a low dielectric constant structured spacer layer (1230) made of a material having a relative dielectric constant of 1.3, combined with a dielectric slab (1260) attached to the structure of alternating layers (1220). In this simulation model or example, the structure (1220) has 15 dielectric slats, where the slats have a thickness of 100 μm and adjacent slats are separated by an air gap of 300 μm. The slats (1140) are made of a material having a relative permittivity of 3.6. To provide a mechanically realistic and stable pusher structure, a dielectric slab (1260) or dielectric plate (1260) with a thickness of about half a wavelength, e.g. 2.82 mm in the case of a relative permittivity of 3.6, is added.

[0173] FIG. 12b illustrates the results of simulated input reflection coefficient measurements performed for the 3D simulated test arrangement of FIG. 12a, in which the pusher (1210) is a stacked pusher of 15 slats having a structured spacer layer (1230). The structured spacer layer (1230), slats, and dielectric slab (1260) are made of materials having relative permittivity of 1.3, 3.6, and 3.6, respectively. The results of the simulated reflection coefficient measurements are presented on diagram (1273) and Smith chart (1276).

[0174] The marker for Port 1 in Fig. 12b is at approximately -22.6 dB and (36.9 - j5.5)Ω at 28 GHz (0.074 exp(+j 267.5°)). The marker for Port 2 in Fig. 12b is at approximately -14.7 dB and (26.7 - j4.6)Ω at 28 GHz (0.183 exp(+j 207.4°)).

[0175] Radiation patterns of two exemplary vertical cutting planes for one selected polarization of a dual-polarized antenna are illustrated in diagrams (1283, 1286).

[0176] The radial pattern results for the first cutting plane are as follows:

[0177] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0178] Main lobe size: 9.79 dBi,

[0179] Main lobe direction: 3.0 degrees,

[0180] Angle width (3 dB): 61.6 degrees, and

[0181] Side lobe level: -13.7 dB.

[0182] The radiation pattern results for the second cutting plane are as follows:

[0183] Frequency: 28 GHz,

[0184] Main robe size: 9.74 dBi,

[0185] Main lobe direction: 0.0 degrees,

[0186] Angle width (3dB): 50.9 degrees,

[0187] Side Lobe Level: -11.8 dB.

[0188] FIG. 13 illustrates a comparison table (1300) for changes in the feed reflection coefficient. That is, for different cases described in the “Description” column, changes in the 28 GHz feed reflection coefficient and feed reflection are shown in the table. Comments related to the cases indicated by letters in the last column of the table will be found below:

[0189] Small differences between simulations of a "antenna-only" structure, that is, one without any pushers, can be attributed to different sizes of "air volumes" and different meshes in the computational domain.

[0190] B permittivity ε rel According to measurements using a pusher made of a homogeneous foam dielectric with a value of 1.2, it is not known whether (somewhat) larger variations are also acceptable to some extent, but such variations in feed reflection are acceptable.

[0191] When used for a C homogeneous pusher, ε such as PEEK rel Materials with a permittivity of 3.6 lead to completely unacceptable disturbances in the antenna.

[0192] D This is an exemplary example demonstrating a significant reduction in antenna disturbance using a laminated sheet pusher, provided that the individual orientations of the electric field and the pusher layers are appropriate. Orthogonal polarization (feeding to other ports of the patch antenna) is — much larger than 0.224 reported for "correct" polarization — |Γ 9,port2 - This leads to a change in the reflection coefficient of Γ4| = 0.318. This difference is ε rel For layers with a larger permittivity of 3.6, e.g., in case #13, the variation between 0.310 and 0.170 increases depending on the orientation and fields of the layers.

[0193] E A thin structured spacer layer is ductile, but the foam (ε) is sufficiently rigid with a thin thickness (0.3 mm). rel It is assumed that it is manufactured as = 1.3). This spacer layer will be processed specifically according to the layout of the antenna (array) aperture surface.

[0194] Comparing Case #9 with Case #11, it is evident that the introduction of a thin structured spacer layer significantly reduces the change in the feed reflection coefficient.

[0195] G thin structured spacer layer (εrel = 1.3) and laminated sheet pusher (made of PEEK, ε rel Using (= 3.6), the change in the feed reflection coefficient is sufficiently small. This can be further reduced by design features such as increasing the period of the stacked sheets, decreasing the dielectric volume fraction of the stacked sheet components, or adding a half-wave plate. It should be noted that the performance of such structures is valid only for single linear polarization antennas and arrays.

[0196] Regarding the radiation pattern, focusing effects, such as higher directivity and a narrower beam in a direction perpendicular to the antenna surface, are caused by dielectric pushers. As long as this effect is small, it does not have a significantly negative impact on test applications. With the exception of exemplary case 3, such as a perfectly homogeneous PEEK pusher, all other pushers cause only small pattern changes.

[0197] In conclusion, the proposed concept enables the realization of an "electromagnetically transparent" pusher primarily fabricated from high-dielectric materials for single linear polarization antennas.

[0198] Implementation alternatives

[0199] Some aspects have been described in relation to devices, but these aspects also represent descriptions of corresponding methods, whereby a block or device corresponds to a method step or a feature of a method step. Similarly, aspects described in relation to method steps also represent descriptions of corresponding blocks or items or features of a corresponding device. Some or all of the method steps may be executed by (or using) a hardware device. In some embodiments, one or more of the most important method steps may be executed by such a device.

[0200] The embodiments described above are merely examples of the principles of the invention. It is understood that modifications and variations of the arrangements and details described herein will be apparent to those skilled in the art. Accordingly, this is intended to be limited only to the appended claims, rather than to the specific details presented by the description and explanation of the embodiments in this specification.

Claims

Claim 1 A pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) for use in automated test equipment to mechanically push a device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) into a socket (130) of the device under test, wherein the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) has alternating dielectric permittivity of a higher dielectric constant (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) and a lower dielectric permittivity (160b, 260b, 560b). A structure (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) having layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220), wherein the layers extend in a first direction (170, 270) within + / -45° of the push direction (170, 270), a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 2 In claim 1, a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210), wherein the ratio between the thickness of the layers of the higher dielectric permittivity (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) and the thickness of the layers of the lower dielectric permittivity (160b, 260b, 560b) is 1:10 to 2:

1. Claim 3 In claim 1, the alternating layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) comprise higher dielectric permittivity regions (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) of 9 vol.% to 66.6 vol.% or 20 vol.% to 60 vol.% and lower dielectric permittivity regions (160b, 260b, 560b) of 91 vol.% to 33.3 vol.% or 80 vol.% to 40 vol.%, a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 4 In claim 1, the surface of the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) configured to touch the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) is such that the test target device (110, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) is within 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) by the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) A pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) formed to avoid touching or approaching the conductive edge of the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the antenna (1020, 1150, 1250). Claim 5 In claim 1, the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) comprises a spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) configured to be between the alternating parallel layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) and the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), wherein the spacer is perpendicular to the alternating layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) within a tolerance of + / -15°, and / or the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) is a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) that is parallel to the surface of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) to be pushed by the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) within a tolerance of + / -15°. Claim 6 In claim 5, the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) is configured to touch the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) such that the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) avoids touching or approaching the conductive edge of the antenna of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) within a distance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), and the pusher (140) 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 7 In claim 5, the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) is a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) having a relative permittivity of 1.5 or less. Claim 8 In claim 5, the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) has a thickness of 50 micrometers to 500 micrometers, and the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 9 In claim 8, the spacer (290, 590, 830, 1013, 1130, 1230) has a thickness of 100 micrometers to 200 micrometers, and the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 10 In claim 1, the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) comprises a dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) that is transverse or perpendicular to the pushing direction within a tolerance of + / -15°, and the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) is configured to mechanically support the layers of the higher dielectric permittivity, the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 11 In claim 10, the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) has a thickness equal to an integer multiple of the half wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) within a distance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), and the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) and the test The distance between the surfaces of the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) is at least one wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 12 In claim 10, the length of the alternating parallel layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) in the push direction (170, 270) is 0.5 to 2 times the free space wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 13 In claim 1, the higher dielectric permittivity layers (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) are pushers (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) having a relative permittivity greater than 2. Claim 14 In claim 1, the higher dielectric constant layers (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) are made of a polymer or polycarbonate or quartz or Teflon or PEEK material, and the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 15 In claim 1, the lower dielectric permittivity layers (160b, 260b, 560b) have a relative permittivity of 1.5 or less, and the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 16 In claim 1, the lower dielectric constant layers (160b, 260b, 560b) are pushers (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) containing air. Claim 17 In claim 1, the push direction (170, 270) is perpendicular within a tolerance of + / -15° to the far-field direction of the electric field at the main lobe (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), or the push direction (170, 270) is perpendicular within a tolerance of + / -15° to the main surface of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), or the push direction (170, 270) is perpendicular within a tolerance of + / -15° to the main surface of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), and the push direction (170, 270) is perpendicular within a tolerance of + / -15° to the main surface of the device under test socket (130), the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950), 960, 1010, 1110, 1210). Claim 18 A test arrangement for testing a test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), comprising a test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) having an antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910), wherein the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) is pushed into a test target device socket (130) by a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) according to claim 1 in order to test the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250). Claim 19 In claim 18, the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) comprises a dielectric slab that is transverse or perpendicular to the pushing direction within a tolerance of + / -15°, the dielectric slab is configured to mechanically support the layers of the higher dielectric permittivity, and the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) of the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) is an antenna (120, 220, 500, 600) of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), Within a tolerance of 1 / 10 of the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the device under test, the dielectric material of the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) has a thickness equal to an integer multiple of the half wavelength of the electromagnetic wave transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the device under test, and the dielectric slab (280, 580, 1260) of the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) and the antenna (120, 220, 500) of the device under test (110, 1020, 1150, 1250), A test arrangement in which the distance between the surfaces of 600, 710, 810, 910) is at least one wavelength of electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250). Claim 20 In claim 18, the length of the alternating parallel layers of the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) in the push direction (170, 270) is 0.5 to 2 times the free space wavelengths of the electromagnetic waves transmitted or received by the antenna (120, 220, 500, 600, 710, 810, 910) of the device to be tested (110, 1020, 1150, 1250). Claim 21 A method for mechanically pushing a test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) into a test target device socket (130) of automated test equipment, the method comprises the step of mechanically pushing the test target device (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) into the test target device socket (130) with a pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210), wherein the pusher (140, 240, 340, 520, 720, 950, 960, 1010, 1110, 1210) has a higher dielectric permittivity (160a, 260a, 560a, 1140) and a lower A method for mechanically pushing a device to be tested (110, 1020, 1150, 1250) into a device to be tested socket (130) of an automated test equipment, comprising a structure (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) having alternating layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) of dielectric permittivity (160b, 260b, 560b), wherein the layers (150, 250, 550, 1016, 1120, 1220) extend in a first direction within + / -45° of a push direction (170, 270).

Images