Fig 1.
The implantable medical devices schematic diagram (IMDs) [3].
Table 1.
Performance comparison of the proposed antenna with recent work.
Fig 2.
Antenna proposal with dimensions, (a) front view, (b) side view, and (c) 3D perspective.
Table 2.
List of optimized parameters for the proposed antenna.
Fig 3.
The antenna design process begins with the rectangular monopole, followed by a slotted monopole, a modified slotted monopole, and a modified slotted monopole with a ground plane (ANT IV), (e) S11 simulation findings, (f) axial ratio comparison in dB.
Fig 4.
Variations in "w1," "wf," "Wg," "L2," "LG," and "G" are all studied parametrically to see how they affect the antenna’s performance.
Fig 5.
A top view, a bottom view, and a configuration of the antenna within an anechoic chamber are shown for the prototype antenna that was manufactured.
Fig 6.
Comparison of the printed prototype antenna’s modelling and measurement of its free space reflection coefficients.
Fig 7.
(a) 2.45 GHz antenna open space 2D radiation pattern, (b) 2.45 GHz radiating monopole current distribution.
Fig 8.
The gain and axial ratio of the printed monopole antenna when it was tested in open space, as well as the results of the simulation.
Table 3.
A comparison of the simulated and observed findings was carried out in free space at 2.45 GHz.
Fig 9.
Antenna bending analysis at 2.45 GHz, (a) difference in S11, (b) comparison in AR.
Fig 10.
The antenna was bent along the x-axis by 30 millimeters, and its S11 response was observed after the bend.
Fig 11.
Radiation pattern of an antenna in free space when it is bent in two dimensions along the x-axis (Bx = 30mm).
Fig 12.
S11 and AR antenna bending at 2.45 GHz are compared in (a) and (b) respectively.
Fig 13.
Flexibility and S11 behavior in a y-axis bent antenna (By = 30 mm).
Fig 14.
Radiation pattern of antenna in free space when bent along y-axis (By = 30mm).
Fig 15.
Perspective and side views of a human skin phantom box.
Fig 16.
In human tissue’ skin-mimicking gel,’ antenna measurements are performed.
Fig 17.
Analyses of the antenna S11 in skin tissue compared to synthetic S11.
Fig 18.
Skin tissue was used to simulate and measure farfield outcomes at a frequency of 2.45 GHz.
Fig 19.
The axial ratio of the prototype printed antenna within skin is compared to the simulation and test gains.
Table 4.
At a frequency of 2.45 GHz, both theoretical and experimental findings were compared.
Fig 20.
At 2.45 GHz, the proposed antenna’s SAR distribution within skin tissue measures 1 g.