Performance Comparison between Nonidentical Segmented Exponential Concave and Nonidentical Segmented Exponential Convex Serrated CATRs

<table>Fresnel-zone field for <svg height="12.4875" id="M45" style="vertical-align:-0.20474pt" version="1.1" viewbox="0 0 69.0625 12.4875" width="69.0625" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
<g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,.062,12.162)"><path d="M244 635q90 0 143 -72t53 -177q0 -133 -65 -229.5t-171 -139.5q-79 -32 -140 -32l-5 30q109 18 185 91t101 186l-68 -36q-29 -16 -60 -16q-79 0 -129 51.5t-50 130.5q0 80 57 146.5t149 66.5zM228 602q-52 0 -78 -45.5t-26 -98.5q0 -69 36.5 -115.5t97.5 -46.5
q53 0 90 28q4 31 4 66q0 51 -9.5 95.5t-39 80.5t-75.5 36z" id="x39"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,8.222,12.162)"><path d="M241 635q53 0 94 -28.5t63.5 -76t33.5 -102.5t11 -116q0 -58 -11 -112.5t-34 -103.5t-63.5 -78.5t-94.5 -29.5t-95 28t-64.5 75t-34.5 102.5t-11 118.5q0 58 11.5 112.5t34.5 103t64.5 78t95.5 29.5zM238 602q-32 0 -55.5 -25t-35.5 -68t-17.5 -91t-5.5 -105
q0 -76 10 -138.5t37 -107.5t69 -45q32 0 55.5 25t35.5 68.5t17.5 91.5t5.5 105t-5.5 105.5t-18 92t-36 68t-56.5 24.5z" id="x30"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,16.381,12.162)"><path d="M529 97q-70 -109 -136 -109q-41 0 -56 94q-23 144 -37 284q-38 -88 -99 -202.5t-93 -156.5q-26 -8 -76 -19l-9 21q71 78 145.5 193t124.5 232q-5 84 -15 128q-12 55 -29.5 75.5t-42.5 20.5q-21 0 -45 -13l-8 24q16 17 46 30t55 13q43 0 70 -46.5t40 -169.5
q27 -249 51 -392q7 -46 23 -46q24 0 70 60z" id="x1D706"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,29.538,12.162)"><path d="M528 54l-36 -38l-198 201l-198 -201l-36 38l197 200l-197 201l36 38l198 -202l198 202l36 -38l-197 -201z" id="xD7"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,43.29,12.162)"><path d="M244 635q90 0 143 -72t53 -177q0 -133 -65 -229.5t-171 -139.5q-79 -32 -140 -32l-5 30q109 18 185 91t101 186l-68 -36q-29 -16 -60 -16q-79 0 -129 51.5t-50 130.5q0 80 57 146.5t149 66.5zM228 602q-52 0 -78 -45.5t-26 -98.5q0 -69 36.5 -115.5t97.5 -46.5
q53 0 90 28q4 31 4 66q0 51 -9.5 95.5t-39 80.5t-75.5 36z" id="x39"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,51.45,12.162)"><path d="M241 635q53 0 94 -28.5t63.5 -76t33.5 -102.5t11 -116q0 -58 -11 -112.5t-34 -103.5t-63.5 -78.5t-94.5 -29.5t-95 28t-64.5 75t-34.5 102.5t-11 118.5q0 58 11.5 112.5t34.5 103t64.5 78t95.5 29.5zM238 602q-32 0 -55.5 -25t-35.5 -68t-17.5 -91t-5.5 -105
q0 -76 10 -138.5t37 -107.5t69 -45q32 0 55.5 25t35.5 68.5t17.5 91.5t5.5 105t-5.5 105.5t-18 92t-36 68t-56.5 24.5z" id="x30"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.017,-0,0,-.017,59.609,12.162)"><path d="M529 97q-70 -109 -136 -109q-41 0 -56 94q-23 144 -37 284q-38 -88 -99 -202.5t-93 -156.5q-26 -8 -76 -19l-9 21q71 78 145.5 193t124.5 232q-5 84 -15 128q-12 55 -29.5 75.5t-42.5 20.5q-21 0 -45 -13l-8 24q16 17 46 30t55 13q43 0 70 -46.5t40 -169.5
q27 -249 51 -392q7 -46 23 -46q24 0 70 60z" id="x1D706"></path></g>
</svg> NISE-convex
and NISE-concave serrated CATRs for cases 1, 2, and 3.</table>

International Journal of Antennas and Propagation

fig5

Figure 5

Figure 5: Performance Comparison between Nonidentical Segmented Exponential Concave and Nonidentical Segmented Exponential Convex Serrated CATRs 