28 GHz 1-Bit RIS Design in HFSS for 6G: Unit Cell to Array
HFSS / 6G RIS
90 MHz Electrically Small PCB Loop Antenna in CST for RFID
An electrically small 90 MHz loop must fit a handheld PCB while maintaining useful magnetic near field, impedance match and radiation/ohmic efficiency despite strong size and user-loading constraints.
Electrical size changes the design rules
At 90 MHz, a handheld PCB is electrically small, so the antenna behaves differently from a resonant full-size loop. Matching, loss and near-field coupling become dominant constraints.
Do not optimize S11 alone
A deep S11 dip can be created with a narrow, lossy match. Monitor current, total efficiency and magnetic near field while tuning the geometry and matching network.
Near-field behavior matters for RFID
For tag interaction, map the H-field in the intended coupling volume and test orientation or distance. This is more application-relevant than far-field gain alone.
Hand and enclosure detuning
A handheld device should include cases with housing and hand proximity. Parameter sweeps can show how much retuning or adaptive matching is required.
Research extensions
Tunable matching, ferrite loading, tag-coupling co-design and multi-grip robustness are useful research directions for an electrically small RFID loop.
Need this topic implemented or customized?
Share your project title, abstract or base paper, preferred software version and required plots. The existing video project can be reviewed as a baseline and extended around a measurable research objective.
Related research
DFBGS 5.9 GHz Printed Antenna in HFSS: Novelty and Validation
HFSS / Printed Antennas
Biconical Antenna with FSS at 2.45 GHz: Research Workflow
HFSS / CST / FSS
Related Research
More engineering research guides
HFSS / Printed Antennas
DFBGS 5.9 GHz Printed Antenna in HFSS: Novelty and Validation
Topic FAQs
Frequently asked questions
The project is modeled primarily in CST Studio Suite. The exact release, material data, solver options and result reports should be kept consistent for reproducible research.
Report the core physical or electrical outputs, a controlled baseline comparison, parameter sensitivity and the assumptions required to reproduce the model. Avoid claiming unverified numerical improvements.
Yes. A stronger extension should define a measurable research gap, a reproducible baseline, a proposed change and validation metrics rather than changing geometry or controller parameters without a hypothesis.
