INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Wired Antenna Arrays For 5G Applications in Cellular Base  
Stations: A Comparative Performance Analysis  
Akande. A1, Alade. M. O.2, Adewunmi. A. S.2, Aremu. O. A.1  
1Department of Physics, The Polytechnic, Ibadan. Nigeria.  
2Department of Pure and Applied Physics, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso,  
Nigeria.  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150600153  
Received: 26 June 2026; Accepted: 01 July 2026; Published: 17 July 2026  
ABSTRACT  
The deployment of fifth-generation (5G) cellular networks demands advanced antenna systems capable of  
delivering high gain, wide bandwidth, low return loss, and efficient beamforming. This article presents a  
comprehensive comparative analysis of wired antenna arrays specifically dipole arrays, Yagi-Uda arrays, and  
log-periodic dipole arrays (LPDAs) designed for 5G base station applications at 3.5 GHz. Using CST Microwave  
Studio simulations, single-element and multi-element configurations were evaluated against key performance  
metrics including return loss, VSWR, gain, directivity, bandwidth, and radiation pattern characteristics. The ten-  
element dipole array achieved a gain of 11.79 dBi with a narrow beamwidth of 16.4°, representing a 9.5 dB  
improvement over a single dipole. The ten-director Yagi-Uda demonstrated superior return loss (-25.22 dB) and  
gain (11.7 dBi) compared to the three-director version (8.9 dBi). The four-element LPDA array exhibited  
enhanced bandwidth (0.508 GHz) and improved VSWR (1.255) relative to its single-element counterpart. These  
findings provide quantitative guidelines for selecting optimal wired antenna configurations for specific 5G  
deployment scenarios.  
Keywords: 5G base station, dipole array, Yagi-Uda antenna, log-periodic dipole array, antenna array,  
beamforming, CST simulation, sub-6 GHz  
INTRODUCTION  
The evolution from 1G to 5G networks has been characterized by exponential growth in data rates, device  
connectivity, and application complexity. Fifth-generation (5G) technology, operating across sub-6 GHz and  
millimeter-wave bands, promises ultra-high data rates (up to several Gbps), ultra-low latency (sub-millisecond),  
and massive device connectivity supporting up to 10⁶ devices per square kilometer [1, 2]. Central to realizing  
these capabilities are advanced antenna systems deployed at base stations, which must provide beamforming,  
spatial multiplexing, and improved spectral efficiency [3].  
Among various antenna technologies, wired antenna arrays—including dipole arrays, Yagi-Uda arrays, and log-  
periodic dipole arrays—offer distinct advantages for 5G base stations. Dipole arrays provide fundamental  
building blocks with predictable performance and ease of fabrication. Yagi-Uda arrays deliver high  
unidirectional gain with simple feeding structures. Log-periodic dipole arrays offer wideband operation with  
consistent radiation characteristics across frequency [4, 5].  
Despite significant progress in 5G antenna research, limited comparative studies exist that systematically  
evaluate these wired antenna configurations under unified simulation conditions. This article addresses this gap  
by providing a quantitative, evidence-based comparison of dipole, Yagi-Uda, and log-periodic arrays designed  
for the 3.5 GHz mid-band spectrum, a critical frequency range for 5G deployment worldwide.  
Page 2130  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
ANTENNA DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY  
Design Specifications  
All antennas were designed for a center frequency of 3.5 GHz using CST Microwave Studio 2024. The free-  
space wavelength (λ) at this frequency is 85.7 mm. Table 1 summarizes the design parameters for each antenna  
type.  
Table 1: Design Parameters for Wired Antenna Arrays  
Antenna Type Configuration  
Key Dimensions  
Element Count  
Dipole  
Half-wave  
Length: 40.7 mm  
1, 10  
Yagi-Uda  
Log-periodic  
Reflector-Dipole-Directors Lref: 44.6 mm, Ldip: 41.0 mm 4, 12  
Tapered dipole array τ = 0.9, σ = 0.07 6, 4 (array)  
Dipole Array Design  
The half-wave dipole serves as the fundamental radiating element. The total dipole length is given by:  
퐿푑푟푖푣푒푛  
=
휆2 × 푘  
where k is the velocity factor that accounts for end effects which is equivalent to 0.95  
85.7  
퐿 =  
× 0.95  
2
∴ 퐿 = 40.70 푚푚  
For the ten-element uniform linear array, element spacing was set at d = λ/2 = 42.85 mm to optimize constructive  
interference while suppressing grating lobes. The array factor for uniform excitation is:  
푁
(
)
sin[ ꢀ푑 cos ꢁ+훽 ]  
2
( )  
퐴퐹 휃 =  
1
(
)
sin[ ꢀ푑 cos ꢁ+훽 ]  
2
Yagi-Uda Array Design  
The Yagi-Uda antenna comprises a reflector, driven dipole, and multiple directors. Element lengths follow  
standard ratios:  
Reflector: LR = 0.52λ = 44.6 mm  
Driven dipole: LD = 0.48λ = 41.0 mm  
Directors: LDi = (0.46 - 0.002i) × λ for i = 1 to 10  
Spacing between elements was maintained at 0.15λ to 0.2λ for optimal mutual coupling.  
Wavelength Calculation  
The fundamental parameter for antenna element dimensions is the wavelength (λ), which is determined by the  
speed of light and the center frequency of operation:  
푐
3 × 108  
⁄
ꢂ =  
=
3.5 × 109  
푓
∴ ꢂ = 0.0857 푚 = 85.7 푚푚  
Page 2131  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Table 2: Estimation of Yagi-Uda elements.  
Element  
Reflector  
Driven Dipole  
Director 1  
Director 2  
Director 3  
Length Formula  
퐿푅 = 0.52ꢂ  
Calculated Length (mm)  
44.6  
41.0  
39.4  
38.6  
37.7  
퐿퐷 = 0.48ꢂ  
퐿푑1 = 0.46ꢂ  
퐿푑2 = 0.45ꢂ  
퐿푑3 = 0.52ꢂ  
These lengths are selected to ensure constructive interference in the forward direction, enhancing antenna gain.  
Log-Periodic Dipole Array Design  
The LPDA was designed using scaling factor τ = 0.9 and spacing factor σ = 0.07. The longest dipole length is:  
푐
퐿1 =  
2푓  
1
3 × 108  
2 × 3.5 × 109  
퐿1 =  
= 50 푚푚  
Thus, the longest dipole length is 50 mm, serving as the reference for all subsequent dipole sizes. Each  
subsequent dipole element length is scaled using τ, while the spacing between adjacent dipoles is computed using  
σ for each element ꢃ (ꢃ = 1 푡표 6)  
퐿푖 = 퐿1 × 휏푖−1  
ꢄ +ꢄ  
ꢅ
푆푖 =  
ꢅ+1 × 휎  
2
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  
Dipole Antenna: Single Element vs. Ten-Element Array  
Return Loss of Dipole Antenna  
Figure 1(a): Simulated Return Loss (S11) of Single Dipole at 3.5 GHz.  
Page 2132  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 1(b): Simulated Return loss (S11) of Ten-Element Dipole Array at 3.5 GHz  
Simulated VSWR of the Dipole  
Page 2133  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 2(a): Simulated VSWR of Single dipole at 3.5 GHz.  
Figure 2(b): Simulated VSWR of the ten-element array at 3.5 GHz.  
Gain And Directivity of Dipole Antenna  
Figure 3(a): Simulated 3D Radiation Dipole Antenna with Color-coded Gain at 3.5 GHz  
Page 2134  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 3(b): Simulated 3D Radiation Pattern Gain of the Ten-Element Dipole Array.  
Beamwidth of Dipole Antenna  
Figure 4(a): Simulated 2D Far Field Directivity of a Single Element Dipole Antenna at 3.5 GHz  
Page 2135  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 4(b): Simulated 2D Far Field Directivity of a Ten-Element Array Dipole Antenna at 3.5 GHz.  
Table 3: Performance Comparison of Dipole Configurations  
Parameter  
Single Dipole Ten-Element Array Improvement  
Return Loss (dB)  
VSWR  
Bandwidth (GHz)  
Gain (dBi)  
Directivity (dBi)  
Beamwidth (3 dB)  
Side Lobe Level (dB) -22  
-23.30  
1.55  
1.00  
2.23  
2.21  
-23.39  
1.158  
1.10  
11.79  
11.70  
16.4°  
-18  
Negligible  
↓ 25.3%  
↑ 10%  
↑ 9.56 dB  
↑ 9.49 dB  
↓ 79%  
78.0°  
↑ 4 dB  
The ten-element dipole array demonstrated substantial performance enhancement over the single-element  
configuration, with realized gain increasing from 2.23 dBi to 11.79 dBi (Δ = +9.56 dB, approximating the  
theoretical 10log₁₀(10) = 10 dB bound) and directivity rising from 2.21 dBi to 11.70 dBi, while the half-power  
beamwidth narrowed from 78.0° to 16.4°, a 79% reduction yielding a spatial selectivity improvement factor of  
4.76 and the side lobe level increased marginally from -22.0 dB to -18.0 dB, remaining well below the theoretical  
-13.2 dB limit for uniform linear arrays. These results translate to a 3× increase in maximum communication  
range at fixed transmit power (or equivalently, a 10 dB reduction in required power for constant coverage),  
improved angular resolution enabling enhanced spatial multiplexing capacity for massive MIMO operation, and  
controlled side lobe radiation maintaining interference levels within 3GPP compliance thresholds. The near-  
ideal gain achievement (0.44 dB deviation from theory), superior side lobe suppression (-18.0 dB exceeding  
theoretical expectations), and excellent impedance matching (VSWR = 1.158) collectively establish the ten-  
element dipole array as a high-performance solution for 5G base stations requiring focused beams, high spectral  
efficiency, and robust interference management in both rural long-range and dense urban deployment scenarios.  
Yagi-Uda Antenna: Three-Director vs. Ten-Director Configuration  
Yagi-Uda Return Loss  
Page 2136  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 5(a): Simulated return loss of a Yagi-Uda antenna at 3.5 GHz  
Figure 5(b): Simulated return loss of Yagi-Uda antenna with ten directors’ array at 3.5 GHz  
Page 2137  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Gain of Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 6(a): Radiation Pattern of Single Element Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 6(b): Radiation Pattern of Yagi-Uda Antenna with Ten Directors  
Page 2138  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Simulated Directivity of Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 7(a): Far Field Directivity of a Single Element Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 7(b): Far field Directivity of a Yagi-Uda Antenna with Ten Directors  
Page 2139  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Voltage Standing Wave Ratio of Yagi-Uda Antenna Simulated  
Figure 8(a): VSWR of a Single Three Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 8(b): VSWR of a Ten Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Page 2140  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Simulated Input Admittance for Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 9(a): Simulated Admittance for Three Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 9(b): Simulated Admittance for Ten Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Page 2141  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Simulated Impedance for Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure 10(a): Simulated Impedance for Three Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Figure(b): Simulated Impedance for Ten Directors Yagi-Uda Antenna  
Page 2142  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Table 4: Performance Comparison of Yagi-Uda Configurations  
Parameter  
3 Directors 10 Directors Improvement  
Return Loss (dB)  
Reflected Power  
Bandwidth (GHz)  
VSWR  
Gain (dBi)  
Directivity (dBi)  
-14.77  
~4%  
0.26  
1.117  
8.9  
-25.22  
<0.3%  
0.40  
1.448  
11.7  
11.7  
57.7°  
45.00  
↓ 10.45 dB  
↓ 92.5%  
↑ 54%  
Acceptable  
↑ 2.8 dB  
↑ 2.81 dB  
↓ 36%  
8.89  
Beamwidth (3 dB) 89.8°  
Impedance (Ω) 44.89  
Near-ideal  
The ten-director Yagi-Uda antenna demonstrated superior performance compared to its three-director  
counterpart, with gain increasing from 8.9 dBi to 11.7 dBi (Δ = +2.8 dB, corresponding to a 95% increase in  
effective radiated power) and directivity rising from 8.89 dBi to 11.7 dBi, accompanied by a beamwidth  
reduction from 89.8° to 57.7° that enhances spatial focusing. Side lobe levels exhibited a marginal increase from  
-13.3 dB to -12.3 dB (Δ = +1.0 dB), remaining well within acceptable limits for directional applications.  
Impedance stability was exceptionally maintained across both configurations, with values of 44.89 Ω and 45.00  
Ω respectively, deviating less than 10% from the 50 Ω standard and ensuring efficient power transfer with  
minimal reflection (VSWR = 1.448 at 3.5 GHz). These results collectively establish the ten-director Yagi-Uda  
as the optimal configuration, delivering a focused beam with enhanced directivity, nearly doubled radiated  
power, excellent impedance matching, and controlled side lobe radiation, making it highly suitable for 5G base  
station applications requiring long-range, high-gain directional links.  
Log-Periodic Dipole Array: Single Element vs. Four-Element Array  
Simulation of Log Periodic Antenna (Return Loss S11)  
Figure 11(a): Simulated S11 for a Single Element Log Periodic Antenna  
Page 2143  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 11(b): Simulated S11 of Four Elements Array Log Periodic Antenna  
VSWR of a Simulated Log Periodic Antenna  
Figure 12(a): Simulated VSWR of a lLog-Periodic Single Element Antenna  
Page 2144  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 12(b): Simulated VSWR of a lLog-Periodic Antenna Array  
Gain Performance of a Log Periodic Antenna  
Figure 13(a): Simulated Gain for a Single Element Log-Periodic Antenna  
Page 2145  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Figure 13(b): Simulated Gain for Log-Periodic Antenna Array  
Directivity Performance of a Log Periodic Antenna  
Figure 14(a): Simulated 2D Far Field Directivity for a Single Element Log-Periodic Antenna  
Figure 14(b): Simulated 2D Far Field Directivity for Log-Periodic Antenna Array  
Page 2146  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
Table 5: Performance Comparison of LPDA Configurations  
Parameter  
Single Element Four-Element Array Change  
Return Loss (dB)  
Bandwidth (GHz)  
VSWR  
Gain (dBi)  
Directivity (dBi)  
-18.23  
0.123  
1.511  
8.91  
-25.22  
0.508  
1.255  
9.65  
7.95  
180.8°  
62.70  
↓ 6.99 dB  
↑ 313%  
↓ 16.9%  
↑ 0.74 dB  
↓ 0.94 dB  
↑ 101%  
8.89  
Beamwidth (3 dB) 89.8°  
Impedance (Ω) 44.73  
↑ 40%  
The four-element log-periodic array demonstrated substantial performance improvements over the single-  
element configuration, with return loss deepening from -18.23 dB to -25.22 dB (reflected power reduced from  
4.12% to 1.28%, representing a 68.9% reduction in reflection losses), VSWR improving from 1.51 to 1.26, and  
bandwidth expanding remarkably from 0.123 GHz to 0.508 GHz, a 4.13× increase that enables multi-channel  
5G operation. Gain exhibited a modest enhancement from 8.91 dBi to 9.65 dBi (Δ = +0.74 dB, corresponding to  
an 18.8% increase in effective radiated power), while directivity decreased from 8.89 dBi to 7.95 dBi (Δ = -0.94  
dB) accompanied by a substantial beamwidth broadening from 89.8° to 180.8° effectively doubling the angular  
coverage. This trade-off between directivity reduction and coverage expansion indicates that the array  
configuration sacrifices beam sharpness for wider spatial illumination, making it optimally suited for sectoral  
broadcasting and dense urban small-cell deployments where broad angular coverage and frequency agility are  
prioritized over peak directional gain, while the superior impedance matching and extended bandwidth ensure  
robust performance across varying frequency allocations.  
Comparative Analysis Across All Configurations  
Table 6: Summary of Optimal Performance Across Antenna Types  
Antenna  
Type  
Dipole Array  
Yagi-Uda  
LPDA Array  
Best  
Gain  
(dBi)  
11.79  
11.70  
9.65  
Bandwidth VSWR  
(GHz)  
Best Application  
Configuration  
10-element  
10-director  
4-element  
1.10  
0.40  
0.508  
1.158  
1.448  
1.255  
Long-range, point-to-point  
Directional, high-gain  
Wideband, sectoral coverage  
The ten-element dipole array achieved the highest gain (11.79 dBi) and narrowest beamwidth (16.4°), ideal for  
long-distance backhaul links. The ten-director Yagi-Uda offered comparable gain (11.7 dBi) with simpler  
construction. The LPDA array provided the widest bandwidth (0.508 GHz) and broadest coverage (180.8°  
beamwidth), making it optimal for dense urban environments requiring flexible frequency allocation.  
DISCUSSION  
The impedance matching and bandwidth analyses reveal that all three array configurations substantially  
outperform their single-element counterparts, with the ten-element dipole array achieving near-perfect matching  
(VSWR = 1.158, return loss = -23.39 dB, 99.7% efficiency) and the ten-director Yagi-Uda demonstrating the  
deepest return loss (-25.22 dB) with only 0.3% reflected power. The four-element LPDA array exhibited the  
most dramatic bandwidth enhancement (4.13× improvement, from 0.123 GHz to 0.508 GHz) compared to the  
dipole's modest 10% increase (1.00 to 1.10 GHz) and Yagi-Uda's 54% improvement (0.26 to 0.40 GHz),  
confirming the LPDA's inherent wideband nature for multi-channel 5G operation.  
In terms of gain and directivity, the ten-element dipole array achieved the highest gain (11.79 dBi, Δ = +9.56  
dB, deviating only 0.44 dB from the theoretical 10log₁₀(10) bound) and directivity (11.70 dBi), representing a  
9.04× increase in effective radiated power, while the ten-director Yagi-Uda provided 11.70 dBi gain (Δ = +2.80  
dB) with near-identical directivity and stable impedance (45.00 Ω), and the four-element LPDA array delivered  
a modest 0.74 dB gain improvement (8.91 to 9.65 dBi) accompanied by a 0.94 dB directivity reduction.  
Page 2147  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
The radiation pattern characteristics further distinguish these configurations: the ten-element dipole array  
exhibited the narrowest half-power beamwidth (16.4°, 79% reduction from 78.0°) and the best side lobe level (-  
18.0 dB, exceeding the theoretical -13.2 dB limit for uniform linear arrays), providing superior spatial selectivity  
(improvement factor of 4.76) and interference rejection for long-range point-to-point backhaul. The ten-director  
Yagi-Uda demonstrated moderate beamwidth reduction (89.8° to 57.7°, Δ = -35.8%) with excellent impedance  
stability and controlled SLL (-12.3 dB, minimal degradation from -13.3 dB), making it suitable for sectoral  
macro cell deployments.  
Conversely, the four-element LPDA array exhibited a 101% beamwidth broadening (89.8° to 180.8°) with  
significant SLL elevation (-1.0 dB from -13.3 dB), reflecting a deliberate design trade-off that sacrifices beam  
sharpness for wide angular coverage, making it optimal for dense urban small cells requiring broad spatial  
illumination and frequency agility. Collectively, these results establish that the ten-element dipole array excels  
in gain, matching, and selectivity for long-range links; the ten-director Yagi-Uda provides balanced performance  
for sectoral applications; and the four-element LPDA array offers unparalleled bandwidth and coverage for  
multi-band urban deployments, with the selection ultimately dictated by the specific 5G deployment scenario.  
Deployment Recommendations  
Based on the comprehensive comparative analysis of wired antenna arrays for 5G base station applications, the  
ten-element dipole array is recommended for long-range point-to-point backhaul and rural macro cell  
deployments requiring maximum gain (11.79 dBi), narrowest beamwidth (16.4°), best impedance matching  
(VSWR = 1.158), and superior side lobe suppression (-18.0 dB), delivering 3× range extension at constant power  
or 10 dB power reduction for fixed coverage. The ten-director Yagi-Uda is optimally suited for sectoral macro  
cells in suburban environments where balanced performance is prioritized, offering excellent gain (11.70 dBi),  
moderate beamwidth (57.7°), stable impedance (45.00 Ω), and high efficiency (>99%) for 120° sector coverage  
with minimal interference to adjacent sectors. The four-element LPDA array is the preferred solution for dense  
urban small cells and multi-band deployments requiring frequency agility, providing the widest bandwidth  
(0.508 GHz, 4.13× improvement), broadest coverage (180.8° HPBW), good impedance matching (VSWR =  
1.255), and 98.7% efficiency making it ideal for heterogeneous network environments where spectrum  
flexibility, even spatial illumination, and support for multiple frequency channels are critical. The selection  
should ultimately be driven by specific deployment constraints: gain and selectivity for rural backhaul, balanced  
performance for suburban macro cells, and bandwidth with coverage for urban small-cell densification.  
Contribution to Antenna Knowledge  
This research advances antenna engineering knowledge by providing the first unified quantitative framework for  
comparative analysis of wired antenna arrays; dipole, Yagi-Uda, and log-periodic under identical simulation  
conditions at the 3.5 GHz 5G band, establishing performance benchmarks across gain (2.23–11.79 dBi),  
bandwidth (0.123–1.10 GHz), VSWR (1.158–1.511), beamwidth (16.4°–180.8°), and side lobe levels (-18.0 to  
-1.0 dB). The study validates array theory through near-ideal gain achievement (0.44 dB deviation from  
10log₁₀(N) for dipole arrays), demonstrates director scaling relationships (2.8 dB gain improvement with 7  
additional directors in Yagi-Uda), and quantifies LPDA arraying benefits (4.13× bandwidth expansion with  
313% improvement).  
The derived trade-off relationships—gain-bandwidth (2.14 dB reduction yields 4× bandwidth increase),  
directivity-coverage (3.75 dB reduction yields 11× coverage expansion), and impedance-scaling stability  
(impedance variation <1% across Yagi-Uda configurations) provide design engineers with actionable  
optimization guidelines. The CST-based simulation methodology, including VBA macro code for automated  
parametric analysis, offers a reproducible framework for antenna design, while the application-specific selection  
matrix, prioritizing gain for rural backhaul, balanced performance for suburban macro cells, and  
bandwidth/coverage for urban small cells establishes evidence-based decision criteria for 5G infrastructure  
deployment, collectively contributing a comprehensive reference for antenna engineers, network planners, and  
researchers in next-generation wireless communications.  
Page 2148  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,  
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)  
ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026  
CONCLUSION  
This comprehensive simulation-based study of dipole, Yagi-Uda, and log-periodic arrays for 5G base stations at  
3.5 GHz establishes that the ten-element dipole array delivers the highest gain (11.79 dBi, Δ = +9.56 dB),  
narrowest beamwidth (16.4°, 79% reduction), and best impedance matching (VSWR = 1.158, 99.7% efficiency)  
for long-range backhaul; the ten-director Yagi-Uda provides excellent gain (11.70 dBi), deep return loss (-25.22  
dB, 0.3% reflected power), and stable impedance (45.00 Ω) for sectoral macro cells; while the four-element  
LPDA array offers unparalleled bandwidth (0.508 GHz, 4.13× improvement) and widest coverage (180.8°  
beamwidth) for dense urban small cells requiring frequency agility. The established trade-off framework gain  
vs. bandwidth (2.14 dB reduction yields 4× bandwidth increase), directivity vs. coverage (3.75 dB reduction  
yields 11× coverage expansion), and SLL vs. beamwidth provides evidence-based guidelines for antenna  
selection driven by deployment requirements, advancing 5G infrastructure optimization through quantitative  
performance benchmarking and practical deployment recommendations.  
REFERENCES  
1. A. Liu and G. Wang, "Smart antenna technologies for 5G wireless communications: A comprehensive  
survey," IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 4-32, 2019.  
2. Z. Chen, J. Li, and X. Xia, "An overview of array antennas for 5G base stations," IEEE Communications  
Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2711-2734, 2020.  
3. C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design, 4th ed. John Wiley & Sons, 2016.  
4. A. S. Daniyal., "Design of high-gain base station antenna array for mm-wave cellular  
5. communication systems," Scientific Reports, vol. 13, p. 4907, 2023.  
6. M. I. Islam et al., "A novel compact high-gain wide-band log periodic dipole array antenna for wireless  
communication systems," Journal of Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 872-  
894, 2022.  
7. W. L. Stutzman and G. A. Thiele, Antenna Theory and Design, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons, 2012.  
8. T. S. Rappaport, Y. Xing, G. R. MacCartney Jr., A. F. Molisch, E. Mellios, and J. Zhang, "Overview of  
millimeter wave communications for fifth-generation (5G) wireless networks—With a focus on  
propagation models," IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 6213–6230,  
2017.  
9. K. L. Wong, Planar Antennas for Wireless Communications. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons,  
2003.  
10. D. M. Pozar, Microwave Engineering, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2022.  
11. C. A. Balanis, Modern Antenna Handbook. Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, 2008.  
12. S. Kumar, R. K. Chaudhary, and N. Kumar, "High-gain antenna array design for sub-6 GHz 5G base  
station applications," International Journal of RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Engineering, vol.  
31, no. 5, e22631, 2021.  
13. M. Sharawi, Printed Multi-Band MIMO Antenna Systems and Their Performance Metrics. Norwood,  
MA, USA: Artech House, 2019.  
14. H. Yang, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, and J. Zhou, "Wideband high-gain antenna arrays for sub-6 GHz fifth-  
generation wireless communications," IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 118749–118760, 2021  
15. S. Sun, T. S. Rappaport, M. Shafi, H. Tataria, "Propagation models and performance evaluation for 5G  
millimeter-wave wireless communications," IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 67, no. 9,  
pp. 8422–8439, 2018.  
Page 2149  
www.rsisinternational.org