Skip to content

Repository files navigation

Project Platypus — 2.4 GHz Microstrip Patch Antenna

A directional 2.4 GHz patch antenna on 2-layer FR4, designed from first principles — no antenna generator, no reference design, no copied footprint. Every dimension is derived from the cavity model and Hammerstad–Jensen microstrip synthesis, then validated on manufactured hardware over a real RF link.

Status: manufactured and functional. Gain vs the host's internal antenna is not yet characterised.

An early measurement produced an anomalously high delta and was excluded from conclusions pending repeatability. Characterisation is in progress under a controlled procedure — see TEST_PROCEDURE.md and VNA_TEST_PLAN.md.

Commercialization milestone: On September 4, 2026, the Rev 2 development project was approved for the Tindie × NextPCB Hardware Creator R&D Support Program after applying on August 30. The award provides three monthly rounds of standalone PCB-prototyping and international-shipping support. Rev 2 remains an engineering-validation build: a sales listing is still gated on design review, DFM, repeatable RF testing, and pilot-readiness evidence. Later support rounds may be redirected to Platypus One carrier-board fabrication if the antenna converges without another justified spin. See MILESTONES.md.

Board photos: the panel is purple ENIG and photographs beautifully — see the Hackster project this repo accompanies.


The board

One 58 × 210 mm V-scored panel, three antennas. Each board is 58 × 70 mm with an M3 mounting pattern (44 mm square, matching the M5Tab5), a 50 Ω microstrip feed, and an edge-launch MMCX jack (Cinch/Johnson 135-3711-801) seated in a routed notch.

Why three designs on one panel

Impedance matching a patch has two textbook solutions. Rather than pick one on faith, the panel carries all three variants side by side — same substrate, same fab run, directly comparable:

Design Matching method Geometry Predicted Rin
A Inset feed, calculated match y₀ = 9.81 mm, slot 6.3 mm 50 Ω (matched)
B Inset feed, deliberate mismatch y₀ = 7.50 mm, slot 6.3 mm 97 Ω (control)
C Quarter-wave transformer Z_t = 100 Ω, w = 0.709 mm, ℓ = 17.98 mm 50 Ω via λ/4

Design B is intentionally mismatched — the control that tests whether the matching model is doing what the math claims.


Design math (all first-principles)

Substrate: FR4, h = 1.6 mm, εr = 4.4, tan δ ≈ 0.02, 2 layers, ENIG.

Patch width      W = c/(2f₀)·√(2/(εr+1))                    = 38.04 mm
Effective εr     εr_eff = (εr+1)/2 + (εr−1)/2·(1+12h/W)^−½   = 4.086
Fringing ext.    ΔL = 0.412h·((εr_eff+0.3)(W/h+0.264)) /
                          ((εr_eff−0.258)(W/h+0.8))         = 0.742 mm
Patch length     L = c/(2f₀√εr_eff) − 2ΔL                    = 29.44 mm
50 Ω feed width  (Hammerstad–Jensen, FR4 1.6 mm)             = 3.1 mm
Inset depth      Rin(y₀) = Rin_edge·cos²(πy₀/L) → 50 Ω       = 9.81 mm
λ/4 transformer  Z_t = √(50·200) = 100 Ω, w = 0.709 mm, ℓ    = 17.98 mm

Resonance check: L_eff = 29.44 + 2(0.742) = 30.924 mm, √εr_eff = 2.021 → f₀ = 2.3996 GHz.

Inset slot width follows the Salmony method: clearance each side of the feed must be ≥ the substrate height h, giving a 6.3 mm total slot (3.1 + 2×1.6). A slot barely wider than the feed is a common mistake that creates spurious resonances and spoils the match.

Honest analysis notes

  • Return loss is not signal loss. A mismatch costs only 10·log₁₀(1−|Γ|²): even Design B's deliberate 97 Ω feed point loses well under 2 dB of delivered power. The A/B/C comparison therefore needs an S11 sweep (VNA), not RSSI — whatever advantage a patch shows over a chip antenna comes from directivity and escaping the host enclosure, not from matching finesse.
  • Front-to-back is modest by design. The ground plane extends only 10–12 mm (≈0.1 λ) past the patch, so realistic F/B is ~6–10 dB. Fine for "point the gain at the far node"; don't expect a deep rear null indoors.

Manufacturing notes (learned on real hardware)

  • ENIG is required — HASL's uneven surface degrades RF pads.
  • JLCPCB parses V-score geometry from Edge.Cuts/GM1 only — order notes and Dwgs.User lines are ignored. Their V-cut minimum panel size is 70 × 70 mm.
  • The Edge.Cuts outline must be closed loops with exactly two segments per vertex; the MMCX notches are separate internal rectangles sharing no vertices with the perimeter.
  • The MMCX signal pad sits inside the routed notch — contact is made by the connector's spring pin, and the corresponding DRC "unconnected" items are by design (waived in patch_antenna_smp.kicad_dru / DRC exclusions).
  • Solder mask over the radiator shifts resonance down slightly (~10–30 MHz) but does not prevent operation.

Repository layout

patch_antenna_smp.kicad_pcb    KiCad board — the manufactured, field-tested revision
patch_antenna_smp.kicad_pro    KiCad project
patch_antenna_smp.kicad_dru    Custom DRC rules (MMCX edge-clearance waivers)
DESIGN_NOTES_v72.md            Full design derivation, BOM, fab notes
TEST_PROCEDURE.md              5-phase RF test protocol
DRC7.13.1.rpt                  DRC report of the released revision
gerbers/  +  gerbers.zip       Fab package as manufactured (JLCPCB)
BOM/Links.txt                  Component sourcing

Bill of materials (per board)

Ref Part Notes
J1 MMCX 135-3711-801 (Cinch/Johnson) Edge-launch jack, board notch
H1–H4 M3 × 6 mm screw + 5 mm nylon standoff Nylon preferred for RF isolation
Pigtail: SMP-male → MMCX-male, RG178, ~100 mm Host-device dependent

Fab settings: 2-layer FR4 1.6 mm, ENIG, purple mask, white silk, V-score at 70 mm and 140 mm from panel top.

License

Hardware and documentation are released under the CERN Open Hardware Licence v2 — Strongly Reciprocal (CERN-OHL-S v2). You may use, study, modify, manufacture and sell this design, provided derivative hardware designs are shared under the same terms.


Project Platypus — Open Source RF

About

First-principles 2.4 GHz microstrip patch antenna — KiCad, CERN-OHL-S v2. Three matching variants on one panel; gain characterisation in progress.

Resources

Stars

0 stars

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors