Table 3 A comparison of the proposed MTM loaded Patch antenna with existing UHF cube satellite antennas.

⁶

80 × 45 × 1.575

Planar Patch

Antenna Printed EMNZ metamaterial

391–405

1.77

Compatible

Low gain and low efficiency

²³

320 × 80 × 3.17

Printed Antenna

427–437

2.12

Incompatible

Larger dimension

^{24, 25}

72 × 32 × 1.575

Planar Patch Antenna

418–448

0.55

Compatible

Low gain and operating frequency shifted after mount in body

²⁶

170 × 120 × 6.4

Microstrip Patch

435–437

0.7

Incompatible

Larger dimension and low gain

²⁷

150 × 150 × 37

Microstrip Patch

384–410

0.4

Incompatible

Larger dimension and low gain

²⁸

Height :500

Deployable helix

365

8

Incompatible

Antenna performance high but incompatible with 1U CubeSat

²⁹

175

Deployable monopole

435–440

0.08

Compatible

Low efficiency

³⁰

circumference of a 1.5U CubeSat 100 × 100 × 150

cavity backed slot antenna

485 MHz

2.73 dB

Compatible

–

³¹

92 × 40

Planar patch

435 MHz

-1 dB

Compatible

55%

³²

85 × 85 × 31

Inverted-F antenna

400 MHz

5.37

Compatible

–

³³

100 × 100 × 9.4

Stack antenna

2025–2290 MHz

7.4

Compatible

70–96%

^{34, 35}

98 × 98 × 7 mm³ Envelope stowed

170 mm length

Deployable monopole

435–438 MHz

0

Compatible

–

Proposed design

80 × 40 × 3.35

Planar patch antenna with embedded NZIM layer

443.5–455

2.5

Compatible

69% with realized gain of 2.5 dB at operating frequency