Design of a Planar Antenna Array with Wide Bandwidth and Narrow Beamwidth for IR-UWB Radar Applications
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1. The text labels in FIG. 1 (a)-(d) all have outer boxes. Suggest transparency instead.
2. Is there a wrong mark on curve conventional and inset-fed & two-slot in Fig. 2? Please check it carefully.
3. Are these optimized results? The author only scans the parameters L and D, why not the other parameters? The author should explain.
4. The title is "...for IR-UWB Radar Applications ". However, the antenna works in the microwave frequency band. Suggest amendments or explanations.
5. The authors claim that the designed antenna array has the characteristics of Wide Bandwidth and Narrow Beamwidth. However, the operating bandwidth is only 1GHz, and the beam angle is 40 degrees.
6. The author should include a few recent reference in the manuscript as follows:
“Amplitude and frequency tunable absorber in the terahertz range”, Results in Physics, 2022, 34:105263ï¼›
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We would like to thank your comments. We tried our best to revise as you suggested.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors proposed a planar array antenna with improved bandwidth for IR-UWB Radar applications. While the paper is interesting and sounds technical, this reviewer has the following concerns that should be addressed before the possible publication.
1. Please elaborate more on the novelty of your proposed work.
2. Please do a comparison with the similar state-of-the-art works in a form of a table. Then please state the disadvantages and advantages of your proposed antenna. (This will also help with the clarification of the novelty of your work (comment #1).)
3. Please briefly describe why your proposed antenna is suitable for vital sign detection and IR-UWB radar applications.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
We would like to thank your suggestion. We tried our best to revise the manuscript as you suggested.
Please see the attachment to view our response.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
In addition to parameters L and D, it is suggested that the author add other parameter scan results. Why are other parameters not discussed? Although the author added a sentence of explanation in the revised draft, I think it is not convincing enough.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
We would like to thank your comment.
We added two other parameter scan results as you suggested to show how other parameter impacts the antenna performance clearly. This edition is presented in the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for responding to my comments and revising the manuscript accordingly. The paper can be accepted in its current format.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
We would like to thank you for taking the time to comment and giving me valuable advice. Thank you so much.
Best regards.
