Quasi-Isotropic Hybrid Dielectric Resonator Antenna—Bow-Tie Patch with Harmonic Suppression

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

I would like to thank you very much for your disposition on my paper (applsci-1665732, title: "Quasi-isotropic hybrid dielectric resonator antenna–bow-tie patch with harmonic suppression"). Based on the reviewer’s comments, the paper has been revised. The revised sections are notated in highlighted text in the PDF file. The detailed responses for the review comments are attached in a separated file. We greatly value this chance to revise our manuscript.

 

Your consideration is very much appreciated.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Abstract appropriately summarize the paper.

Keywords are incomplete. Some keywords and phrases are missing, such as: hybrid dielectric resonator antenna, bow-tie patch

The introduction is concise and the purpose of the study is clearly defined. The English language is vague (perhaps inaccurate) in some places in the introduction. Almost identical text: " The measured  S11 (<-10 dB) of the proposed antenna is 3.10–3.28 GHz (5.64%), and the operating band and the  isolation of the second and third harmonics are 10.10 and 18.94 dB, respectively. The  simulated gain difference considering all the radiating regions (0< j< 360_ and   0< q < 180_) is at least 7.211 dB.“ appears in three places in the paper: in the abstract, the introduction, and the conclusion. This is not necessary, especially not in the introduction to the paper!

„....the DRA is equivalent to a vertical dipole........“

It is not clear how the DRA is equivalent to a vertical dipole. It seems to me to be equivalent to a vertical monopol !? DRA with metal post would be the equivalent to a vertical monopoly! Bow-tie and DRA-gnd would be the equivalent of a vertical dipole!

The E2 field of the Bow-tie antenna in Figure 2 is incorrectly marked. It is turned perpendicular to the field E2 in Figure 2!

So the fields E1 and E2 are still orthogonal even with this correct orientation of the fields E2!

The paper lists the simulated 3D radiation diagrams E1 and E2, and the total simulated 3D radiation diagram is omitted; why?

How is the optimization of the parameters of the proposed antenna done as stated in the title of Table 1? Optimization is not even mentioned in this paper except in the text; "The optimal design parameters are presented in Table 1."! Also text:“ Table 3: Optimized design parameters of fifth- and seventh-order Chebyshev low-pass filters with a cutoff frequency of 4 GHz (unit: mm).“??

Figures 6. and 7. have an incorrect title. Namely, the title of the picture should give what the picture (diagram) shows! These images do not show: "Proposed antenna with a filter and without a filter:" !!!

Figure 10. has the wrong title!

Although the diagrams in Figure 12 suggest good isotropy (radiation diagram), since the scale is up to 60 dB (20 dB per division), it is still not as good as it appears in these images. So you correctly called it quasi-isotropic!

The conclusion  is correct.

References are written correctly.

 

REMARK:

I am not  an English language expert but I think the results should be titled as simulation results and not simulated results!

How is the simulation made, in which software, application ???

Why is the paper in the template from “ Senors“  journal ???

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

I would like to thank you very much for your disposition on my paper (applsci-1665732, title: "Quasi-isotropic hybrid dielectric resonator antenna–bow-tie patch with harmonic suppression"). Based on the reviewer’s comments, the paper has been revised. The revised sections are notated in highlighted text in the PDF file. The detailed responses for the review comments are attached in a separated file. We greatly value this chance to revise our manuscript.

 

Your consideration is very much appreciated.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx