Patent Publication Number: US-10325742-B2

Title: High performance switch for microwave MEMS

Description:
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS 
     The present application claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/272,280 filed Dec. 29, 2015, and European Application No. 16206593.2 filed Dec. 23, 2016, the disclosures of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference. 
    
    
     FIELD OF THE TECHNOLOGY 
     The present disclosure relates to radio frequency (RF) switches, or more particularly to RF micro electromechanical system (MEMS) lateral switches with improved reliability and reduced risk of stiction, and to applications for the switches in switching networks. 
     BACKGROUND 
     RF MEMS switches have previously been employed in microwave and millimeter-wave communication systems, such as in signal routing for transmit and receive applications, switched-line phase shifters for phased array antennas, and wide-band tuning networks for modern communication systems. In particular, RF MEMS switches (e.g., single-pole multi-throw switches) and switching networks are broadly used in modern telecommunication systems, especially for 2G/3G/4G applications and high precision instrumentation. 
       FIG. 1  illustrates the circuit design of a basic single pole single throw (SPST) lateral RF MEMS switch  100 . As shown in  FIG. 1 , the lateral switch includes a coplanar waveguide  101 , a cantilever beam  140  extending between first and second ports  110 ,  120  of the coplanar waveguide, and an electrostatic actuator (not shown) for actuating the cantilever beam. The actuator is configured to apply a DC bias voltage between the cantilever and the ground line  130  of the coplanar waveguide  101 , thereby causing the free end of the cantilever beam  140  to deflect in the direction of a fixed electrode  125 . When sufficient DC bias is applied, the cantilever beam  140  deflects enough to contact a mechanical stopper of the second port, resulting in the closing (ON state) of the switch. When the DC bias is lowered or removed, the beam  140  returns to its at-rest state (as shown in  FIG. 1 ), thereby opening the switch (OFF state). 
     Compared to PIN diodes or field-effect transistor (FET) switches, RF MEMS switches have been found to offer lower power consumption, higher isolation, lower insertion loss, higher linearity, and lower cost. 
     One drawback of the lateral switch design is that it is prone to electromechanical failure after several switching cycles, especially under hot switching conditions. For instance, the switch may fail due to static friction (or stiction) buildup between the cantilever beam and the mechanical stopper of the waveguide port. Furthermore, the spring constant of the cantilever beam is often too small to overcome the stiction. Another drawback of the lateral switch design is that, with a large number of output ports, they do not achieve a wide band performance with good repeatability, especially at lower microwave frequencies such as about 20 GHz. At lower microwave frequencies, area also plays a major role in the performance of the switch. Isolation and matching also play key roles in the switch, and the effect of isolation degrades gradually with higher number of output ports. 
     Therefore, there is a need to address these and other drawbacks in the field of MEMS switch design. 
     SUMMARY 
     Aspects of the present disclosure provide for an improved design of RF MEMS lateral switches that achieve improved wide band performance with improved repeatability (e.g., lifetime in the order of millions of switches) at lower microwave frequencies. Design in accordance with aspects of the disclosure include an improved RF MEMS switch that is capable of switching a large number of ports in a small chip area, thereby resulting in cost benefits, since area is directly proportional to cost in large-volume manufacturing processes. 
     One aspect of the present disclosure provides for a microelectromechanical switch including a first port (e.g., input port), one or more second ports (e.g., output ports), a cantilever beam, and a mechanical spring connected to the cantilever beam for providing a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam. The cantilever beam extends from a fixed end in contact with either the first port or one of the second ports, to a free end that is connectable to the other of the first port or said one of the second ports. The first and second ports and cantilever beam may be formed in a coplanar waveguide. The switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 22 dB, isolation of at most about 30 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.2 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 20 GHz. The total area of the switch is about 0.09 mm 2 . 
     The switch may be a lateral switch, such that the mechanical spring provides a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam in a lateral direction. The mechanical spring may be configured in a semi-triangular shape. Alternatively, the mechanical spring may provide a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam in an out-of plane direction. Three mechanical springs may be utilized, each mechanical spring being connected to the cantilever beam and providing a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam. The three mechanical springs may be arranged in a Y-configuration. In any of the examples above, the mechanical spring may be actuated by an electrostatic force. 
     The switch may further include an actuator applying a bias voltage, whereby deflection of the cantilever beam is at least in part determined by the applied bias voltage. The actuator may be connected to a bias line. The bias line may be formed from titanium tungsten and separated from the coplanar waveguide by a layer of silicon dioxide. 
     Either the first port or at least one second port may include a mechanical stopper for contacting the free end of the cantilever beam, whereby when the microelectromechanical switch is open, the free end and the mechanical stopper are at a distance from one another that is greater than a distance between the mechanical spring and ground of the coplanar waveguide. 
     In some examples, the switch may include at least two second ports. The fixed end of the cantilever beam may be in contact with the first port, and the free end of the cantilever beam may be switchably connectable to each of said two second ports. The cantilever beam may be connected to at least two mechanical springs, each mechanical spring providing a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam towards or away from a respective one of the two second ports. The switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 25 dB, isolation of at most about 30 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.2 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 20 GHz. 
     In other examples, the switch may include at least three second ports, four second ports, six second ports, seven second ports, eight second ports, ten second ports, eleven second ports, fourteen second ports, or sixteen second ports. The switch may include as many cantilever beams as second ports. A fixed end of each cantilever beam may be in contact with a corresponding one of the second ports, and a free end of each cantilever beam may be switchably connectable to a common junction of the first port. Each cantilever beam is connected to a respective mechanical spring. The mechanical spring may providing a mechanical force to move the cantilever beam towards or away from the common junction. 
     In the case of a switch with three or more second ports, the switch may exhibit one of return loss of at most about 26 dB, isolation of at most about 30 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.22 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 20 GHz for a lateral switch configuration, or return loss of at most about 25 dB, isolation of at most about 22 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.35 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The total area of the switch may be about 0.43 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with four or more second ports, the switch may exhibit one of return loss of at most about 20 dB, isolation of at most about 30 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.26 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 20 GHz for a lateral switch configuration, or return loss of at most about 18 dB, isolation of at most about 20 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.43 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The total area of the switch may be about 0.51 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with six or more second ports, the switch may have a return loss of at most about 18 dB, isolation of at most about 17.5 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.78 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 0.58 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with seven or more second ports, the switch may exhibit one of return loss of at most about 19 dB, isolation of at most about 20 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.36 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 20 GHz for a lateral switch configuration; or return loss of at most about 19 dB, isolation of at most about 17.6 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 0.88 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 0.64 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with eight or more second ports, the switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 15 dB, isolation of at most about 17 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 1.0 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 0.68 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with ten or more second ports, the switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 14.7 dB, isolation of at most about 17 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 1.5 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 0.83 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with eleven or more second ports, the switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 15 dB, isolation of at most about 17 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 1.8 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 0.92 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with fourteen or more second ports, the switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 14 dB, isolation of at most about 14 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 2.2 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 12 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 1.2 mm 2 . 
     In the case of a switch with sixteen or more second ports, the switch may exhibit return loss of at most about 14 dB, isolation of at most about 14 dB, and insertion loss of at most about 1.9 dB at one or more frequencies up to about 26 GHz for an out-of-plane switch configuration. The switch may have a total area of about 2.5 mm 2 . 
     In any of the above switch configurations, the common junction may include a plurality of spokes extending radially therefrom, each spoke switchably connectable to the free ends of the respective cantilever beams. The spokes may be evenly distributed around the common junction such that each pair of adjacent spokes forms a common angle. 
     The present disclosure further provides for a switching network having a plurality of microelectromechanical switches as described herein. The switching network may include a plurality of single pole multiple throw switches as described herein. The switching network may be configured to operate at a frequency of up to about 20 GHz, or up to about 26 GHz. 
     The present disclosure yet further provides for a switch including first and second terminals, a deflectable beam connected to the first terminal and configured to deflect towards the second terminal, such that the beam contacts the second terminal when it is deflected in the direction of the second terminal, a first electrode and a mechanical spring affixed to the beam, and a second electrode spaced apart from the first electrode. A voltage applied to the second electrode causes the first electrode to move towards or away from the second electrode. When the mechanical spring is in a compressed state if the first electrode moves towards the second electrode, and returns to the at-rest state if the first electrode moves away from the second electrode. In some examples, the mechanical spring provides a force to deflect the beam towards the second terminal. In other examples, the mechanical spring provides a force to deflect the beam away from the second terminal. Also, in some examples, the first and second electrodes are spaced farther apart from one another than the first and second terminals are spaced apart. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         FIG. 1  is a plan view diagram of a prior art single pole single throw (SPST) lateral switch. 
         FIGS. 2A-2B and 3A-3D  are plan view diagrams of an example single pole single throw (SPST) lateral RF MEMS switches in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIGS. 4A-4D  are graphical representations of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for each of the example lateral switch designs of  FIGS. 3A-D , respectively. 
         FIG. 5  is a plan view diagram of a single pole double throw (SPDT) lateral switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIGS. 6A-6B  are graphical representations of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 5 . 
         FIG. 7  is a plan view diagram of a single pole three throw (SP3T) lateral switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 8  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 7 . 
         FIG. 9  is a plan view diagram of a single pole four throw (SP4T) lateral switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 10  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 9 . 
         FIG. 11  is a plan view diagram of a single pole seven throw (SPIT) lateral switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 12  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 11 . 
         FIG. 13  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole single throw (SPST) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 14  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 13 . 
         FIG. 15  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole three throw (SP3T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 16  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 15 . 
         FIG. 17  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole four throw (SP4T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 18  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 17 . 
         FIG. 19  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole six throw (SP6T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 20  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 19 . 
         FIG. 21  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole seven throw (SPIT) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 22  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 21 . 
         FIG. 23  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole eight throw (SP8T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 24  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 23 . 
         FIG. 25  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole ten throw (SP10T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 26  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 25 . 
         FIG. 27  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole eleven throw (SP11T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 28  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 27 . 
         FIG. 29  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole fourteen throw (SP14T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 30  is a graphical representation of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 29 . 
         FIG. 31  is a plan view diagram of another example single pole sixteen throw (SP16T) MEMS switch in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. 
         FIGS. 32-33  are graphical representations of return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the lateral switch of  FIG. 31 . 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
       FIGS. 2A and 2B  show an example RF MEMS lateral switch  200  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The lateral switch  200  includes a coplanar waveguide (CPW)  201 , input and output ports  210 ,  220 , and a cantilever beam  240  between the input and output ports. The cantilever beam  240  includes a fixed end in contact to the first port  210 , and extends out from the first port towards a free end  242  that is switchably connectable to the second port  220 . Also included is a mechanical spring  250 , which is attached to the cantilever beam  240  between the input and output ports  210 ,  220 . In the example of  FIG. 2A , the mechanical spring  250  is attached at about mid-length or midpoint of the beam. The mechanical spring has a semi-triangular shape, and is positioned between the cantilever beam  240  and ground  230  of the waveguide. The mechanical force of the spring  250  provides an additional mechanical force to move the free end  242  of the cantilever beam  240  back to its at-rest position when the switch  200  is in an OFF state and does not contact the second port  220 . In this manner, the spring provides additional assurance that the switch is returned to its at-rest state (and the cantilever beam does not remain deflected), when the switch is turned off. 
     The semi-triangular shape of the spring  250  is shown in greater detail in  FIG. 2B . The spring  250  includes a base element  252  that is parallel to the beam  240 , and two spring elements  254  that extend from the base element away from the beam, thereby substantially forming a triangle. The spring includes a contact  256  at the point where the spring elements  254  meet. The contact is parallel to the base element  252 . Thus, the contact is also parallel to the CPW ground  230 . 
     The amount of mechanical force is selected so as to overcome any potential failure of the switch due to stiction, while taking into consideration the effect of the electrostatic force induced when a bias voltage is applied. As in other in-line “DC contact” cantilever switches, electrostatic actuation between the center line and ground causes the cantilever to move in a lateral direction towards the mechanical stopper of the second port. When the cantilever moves, it is necessary that the cantilever contact the second port of the center line without the mechanical spring contacting the ground line, since contacting the ground line would result in a short circuit of the switch. Therefore, a design constraint of the present design, and particularly of the mechanical spring, is that the at-rest distance between the free end of the cantilever beam  242  and the mechanical stopper  225  of the second port  200  (“a” in  FIG. 2A ) should be significantly less than the distance between the contact  256  of the mechanical spring  250  and the CPW ground  230  (“b” in  FIG. 2A ), so that when a DC bias is applied, the free end of the cantilever beam  242  contacts the mechanical stopper  225  without the mechanical spring contact  256  contacting the ground line  230 . 
       FIGS. 3A-D  show four example RF MEMS lateral switches in accordance with some aspects of the present disclosure. Each of the examples of  FIGS. 3A-D  show designs similar to that of  FIGS. 2A-2B , except that the properties of the mechanical spring in each design are different. For example, the mechanical spring of the example of  FIG. 3C  is notably flatter than the other designs, whereas the mechanical spring of the example of  FIG. 3A  is notably more triangular. The tension of the mechanical springs may also vary between the designs, although the geometry and tension of the spring may be mutually exclusive. In this regard, the mechanical spring in the example of  FIG. 3C  exhibits greater stability or lifetime (e.g., over numerous switching cycles) as compared to the springs of the other designs. 
     The different lateral switch designs of  FIGS. 3A-D  may be selected from based on the varying performance provided by each design.  FIGS. 4A-D  show return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for each of the example designs of  FIGS. 3A-D , respectively. As shown in the figures, simulations of the SPST switch show return loss of better than between about 18-22 dB, isolation of about 30 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.13-0.2 dB at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz. 
     The switches of  FIGS. 2 and 3A -D reduce or eliminate the risk of mechanical failure due to dielectric charging, and are capable of operating within a point of stability. Thus, the switches are capable of improving RF power handling under both cold-switching and hot-switching conditions. Moreover, due to the electrostatic actuation of the switch, the cantilever of the switch may be designed with increased stiffness. The cantilever may also be less sensitive to stresses due to its small size and shortened switching time. The switch may also be less sensitive to planarity and stress which significantly improves the overall contact force. The reduced sensitivity in turn improves overall yield. 
     The example design of  FIG. 2A  is a single pole single throw (SPST) switch. However, the design of single pole multiple throw (SPMT) switches may be improved in a similar fashion.  FIG. 5  shows an example RF MEMS single pole double throw (SPDT) lateral switch  500  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SPDT switch  500  includes a coplanar waveguide  501  including an input port  510 , first and second output ports  521 ,  522 , and a single cantilever beam  540  positioned to couple the input port  510  with either one of the output ports  521 ,  522  depending on the direction of lateral deflection of the cantilever beam  540 . Two mechanical springs  551 ,  552  are laterally attached to opposing sides of the cantilever beam  540 . The free end of the cantilever beam  542  is positioned to be able to deflect in either lateral direction so as to come in contact with a contact bump  525 ,  526  (comparable to the mechanical stopper shown in  FIG. 2A ) of either the first output port  521  or the second output port  522 , depending on the direction in which the cantilever beam deflects. Deflection is determined based on the bias voltage applied to the actuators  561 ,  562  from each of the bias pads  571 ,  572 . The bias voltage applied at an actuator causes an electrode at the switch to move towards or away from the actuator, thereby either deflecting the cantilever beam toward the output port, or releasing the cantilever beam so that it moves away from the output port. At a given time, one of the actuators may be “ON,” while the other is “OFF.” Actuation and release of the cantilever beam  540  may aided by the mechanical spring  551 ,  552  on the side of the beam to which the beam deflects. Effectively, the SPDT switch  500  operates in the same fashion as the SPST switch  200  of  FIG. 2A , except that the SPST switch beam  240  operationally closes and opens a switch in only one direction, whereas the SPDT switch beam  540  operationally closes and opens a switch in two opposing directions. 
       FIGS. 6A-B  show simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for each of output ports  521  and  522 , respectively, for the example SPDT lateral switch design of  FIG. 5 . As shown in the figures, the SPDT switch exhibits return loss of better than about 25 dB, isolation (e.g., of one port when another port is activated) by about 30 dB or greater, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.2 dB at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz. 
       FIG. 7  shows an example RF MEMS single pole three throw (SP3T) lateral switch  700  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The input port  710  of the lateral switch includes a central junction  712 . The switch also includes three output ports  721 ,  722 ,  723  from which three separate cantilever beams  741 ,  742 ,  743  that extend to contact the central junction  712 . Each cantilever beam includes a mechanical spring that is actuated by a separate actuator. Each actuator is also shown as being biased by a separate bias pad. Like in the example of  FIG. 5 , at a given time, one of the actuators may be biased, such that the cantilever beam associated with that actuator is deflected and contacts its corresponding output port. In the present example, the input port  710  and cantilever beams  741 ,  742 ,  743  are uniformly distributed around the central junction  712 , although in other examples, the configuration may not be uniform. 
       FIG. 8  shows an average simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the output ports  721 ,  722 ,  723  of the example SP3T lateral switch design of  FIG. 7 . As shown in the figures, the SP3T switch exhibits, on average, return loss of better than about 26 dB, isolation of about 30 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.22 dB at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz. 
       FIG. 9  shows an example RF MEMS single pole four throw (SP4T) lateral switch  900  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP4T switch is similar in design to the SP3T switch in that each output port  921 ,  922 ,  923 ,  924  of the switch is connected to a separate cantilever beam  941 ,  942 ,  943 ,  944  that extends to contact a mechanical stopper on a central junction  912 . The input port  910  and the cantilever beams  941 ,  942 ,  943 ,  944  are evenly distributed around the central junction  912 . Each cantilever beam has its own mechanical spring, actuator and biasing pad to effect deflection of the beam. 
       FIG. 10  shows an average simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the four output ports of the example SP4T lateral switch design of  FIG. 9 . As shown in the figures, the SP4T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 20 dB, isolation of about 26 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.26 dB at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz. 
       FIG. 11  shows an example RF MEMS single pole seven throw (SP7T) lateral switch  1100  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP7T switch  1100  is similar in design to the SP3T and SP4T switches in that each output port  1121 - 1127  of the switch is connected to a separate cantilever beam  1141 - 1147  that extends to contact a mechanical stopper on a central junction  1112 . The input port  1110  and cantilever beams  1141 - 1147  are evenly distributed around the central junction  1112 . Each cantilever beam has its own mechanical spring, actuator and biasing pad to effect deflection of the beam. 
       FIG. 12  shows an average simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the seven ports of the example SP7T lateral switch design of  FIG. 11 . As shown in the figures, the SP7T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 19 dB, isolation of about 20 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.36 dB at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz. 
       FIG. 13  shows another example RF MEMS switch  1300  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. Unlike the lateral switch of  FIG. 2A , the switch of  FIG. 13  includes an out-of-plane cantilever beam  1340  connecting a first port  1310  to a second port  1320  in a coplanar waveguide  1301 . The beam  1340  is attached to three mechanical springs  1351 ,  1352 ,  1353  arranged under the beam and relative to one another in a Y-configuration. Unlike the single mechanical spring of  FIGS. 2A and 2B , which moves side to side (relative to a line drawn between the ports) and within the plane of the waveguide to actuate the lateral switch, the mechanical springs of  FIG. 13  move up and down, orthogonal to the plane of the waveguide. When the springs raise the beam upward, the beam is disconnected from the second port  1320 , thereby opening the switch. When the springs move the beam downward, the beam is connected to the second port, thereby closing the switch. Function of the mechanical springs may be compared to that described in connection with the lateral switch, except that the springs of  FIG. 13  move in a different direction to accommodate the out-of-plane movement of the cantilever beam. 
     In the example of  FIG. 13 , the actuation voltage of the switch is between about 58 V and about 60 V, and the mechanical resonance frequency is about 51 kHz. The total area (including bias lines and pads) of the switch is about 0.094 mm 2 , which enables the achievement of very compact switching networks without compromising microwave performance. 
     Benefits of the switch of  FIG. 13  include: (1) A reduced sensitivity to stress due to its small size and fast switching time; (2) a reduced sensitivity to planarity and stress due to its being a single-contact cantilever switch (this may significantly improve the overall contact force and improve division of electrostatic force over the various paths surrounding the switch, such as in a phase shifter) (3) reduced risk of switch failure due to contact failure (e.g., a contact becoming permanently stuck down) or actuator failure (e.g., a contact becoming permanently stuck up); (4) reduced sensitivity to stress gradients (Residual stress often results in uneven distribution of tip deflection between even identical structures. Hence, different blocks often need different voltages to actuate. The reduction in stress allows for the same voltage to be needed for actuation, thereby decreasing overall yield of the device in which multiple switches are actuated); and (5) improved compactness of multi-switch structures, since the switch may be easily placed on a CPW line. Additional benefits include low cost (batch production) low insertion loss, good input/output matching and moderate isolation response for designs with up to fourteen channels operating at a frequency of up to 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 14  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SPST switch design of  FIG. 13 . As shown in  FIG. 14 , the SPST switch exhibits return loss of better than about 30 dB, isolation of about 21 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.2 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 15  shows an example RF MEMS SP3T switch  1500 . Like the SPST switch of  FIG. 13 , the SP3T switch of  FIG. 15  uses an out-of-plane configuration for the cantilever beams and springs. The switch includes an input port  1510  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  1512 , and three output ports  1521 ,  1522 ,  1523 . The switch also includes three cantilever beams  1541 ,  1542 ,  1543  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Also like in  FIG. 13 , each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction  1512 . The total area of the SP3T switch is about 0.43 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 16  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP3T switch design of  FIG. 15 . As shown in  FIG. 16 , the SP3T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 25 dB, isolation of about 22 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.35 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 17  shows an example RF MEMS SP4T switch  1700  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP4T switch  1700  includes an input port  1710  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  1712 , and four output ports  1721 ,  1722 ,  1723 ,  1724 . The switch also includes four cantilever beams  1741 ,  1742 ,  1743 ,  1744  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP4T switch is about 0.51 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 18  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP4T switch design of  FIG. 17 . As shown in  FIG. 16 , the SP4T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 18 dB, isolation of about 20 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.43 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 19  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole six-throw (SP6T) switch  1900  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP6T switch  1900  includes an input port  1910  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  1912 , and six output ports  1921 - 1926 . The switch also includes four cantilever beams  1941 - 1946  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP6T switch is about 0.58 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 20  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP6T switch design of  FIG. 19 . As shown in  FIG. 20 , the SP6T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 18 dB, isolation of about 17.5 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.78 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 21  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole seven-throw (SP7T) switch  2100  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP7T switch  2100  includes an input port  2110  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  2112 , and seven output ports  2121 - 2127 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  2141 - 2147  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP7T switch is about 0.64 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 22  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP7T switch design of  FIG. 21 . As shown in  FIG. 22 , the SP7T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 19 dB, isolation of about 17.6 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 0.88 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 23  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole eight-throw (SP8T) switch  2300  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP8T switch  2300  includes an input port  2310  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  2312 , and seven output ports  2321 - 2328 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  2341 - 2348  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP8T switch is about 0.68 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 24  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP8T switch design of  FIG. 23 . As shown in  FIG. 24 , the SP8T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 15 dB, isolation of about 17 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 1 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 25  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole ten-throw (SP10T) switch  2500  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP10T switch  2500  includes an input port  2510  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  2512 , and seven output ports  2521 - 2530 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  2541 - 2550  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP10T switch is about 0.83 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 26  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP10T switch design of  FIG. 25 . As shown in  FIG. 26 , the SP10T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 14.7 dB, isolation of about 17 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 1.5 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 27  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole eleven-throw (SP11T) switch  2700  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP11T switch  2700  includes an input port  2110  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  2712 , and seven output ports  2721 - 2731 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  2741 - 2751  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP11T switch is about 0.92 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 28  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP11T switch design of  FIG. 27 . As shown in  FIG. 28 , the SP11T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 15 dB, isolation of about 17 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 1.8 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 29  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole fourteen-throw (SP14T) switch  2900  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP14T switch  2900  includes an input port  2910  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  2912 , and seven output ports  2921 - 2934 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  2941 - 2954  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP14T switch is about 1.2 mm 2 . 
       FIG. 30  shows simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP14T switch design of  FIG. 29 . As shown in  FIG. 30 , the SP14T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 14 dB, isolation of about 14 dB, and worst case insertion loss of about 2.2 dB at frequencies of up to about 12 GHz. 
       FIG. 31  shows an example RF MEMS single-pole sixteen-throw (SP16T) switch  3100  in accordance with an aspect of the present disclosure. The SP16T switch  3100  includes an input port  3110  extending to a center of the switch to provide a central junction  3112 , and seven output ports  3121 - 3156 . The switch also includes seven cantilever beams  3141 - 3156  each extending from a respective output port and switchably connectable to the central junction by an out-of-plane movement. Each beam includes three springs arranged in a Y-configuration. The input port and beams are evenly distributed around the central junction. The total area of the SP16T switch is about 2.5 mm 2  (about 1.56 mm across, and about 1.61 mm top to bottom as shown in  FIG. 31 ) 
       FIGS. 32 and 33  show simulated return loss, isolation, and insertion loss for the example SP16T switch design of  FIG. 31 . As shown in  FIG. 32 , the SP16T switch exhibits return loss of better than about 14 dB and worst case insertion loss of about 1.9 dB at frequencies of up to about 26 GHz.  FIG. 33  shows isolation of about 14 dB up to similar frequencies. 
     As compared to the lateral switches of  FIGS. 2-12 , the configurations shown and demonstrated in  FIGS. 13-33  permit the switches to be placed lateral to one another even closer together without introducing difficulties to the fabrication process. Ultimately, this leads to a reduction of overall area of a device incorporating these switches. As shown, the reduction of area may be on the order of square microns or even a few square millimeters. 
     Matching and loss of a switching network including the above example switches, and particularly the above example SPMT switches, may be improved by reducing the parasitic inductive effects caused by the switches. These effects largely occur between the central junctions of adjacent switches. Parameters such as central junction length (as well as switch footprint, parasitic inductive effects) may be tested using a full wave simulation. The results of the full wave simulation may then be utilized to modify the switch parameters, thereby improving or optimizing performance. 
     The above example switches feature additional design considerations and constraints. For instance, the CPW discontinuities (e.g., between adjacent switches) may include inductive bends. The purpose of these bends is to eliminate higher order modes. The bias pads of the switches may also be routed in a manner that avoids signal leakage and other parasitic effects without affecting performance. The bias pads and lines may themselves be made of a conductive material (e.g., titanium tungsten), and a film or layer of dielectric material (e.g., silicon dioxide) may be positioned between the bias lines and CPW to prevent shorting. 
     Another beneficial property of the configuration of above example switches is their symmetry (e.g., equal angle between each throw of a given switch, equal angle between the each of the input/output ports). Additionally, each of the switches (with the exception of the SP3T switch of  FIG. 7 ) has a mirror symmetry along an axis extending from the input port to the central junction. This configuration of the above example switches permits them to be placed closer together with one another (in designs that accommodate multiple switches). This means that a device with multiple MEMS RF lateral switches (e.g., a phase shifter) may be designed with greater compactness without any fabrication difficulties. The symmetry is especially beneficial for improving compactness of the design. Ultimately, the presently described switch configuration may lead to reduction of overall area of a device including these switches on the order of square microns or even square millimeters, as compared to other conventional topologies. 
     Each of the above described RF MEMS lateral switches exhibits a wideband response with reduced loss, increased isolation and reduced size (improved compactness). Moreover, the RF MEMS switches are capable of being operated at frequencies of up to about 20 GHz with a large number of ports. Therefore, these switches are useful for such applications as satellite switching networks wideband radios, and the like. 
     Although the invention herein has been described with reference to particular embodiments, it is to be understood that these embodiments are merely illustrative of the principles and applications of the present invention. It is therefore to be understood that numerous modifications may be made to the illustrative embodiments and that other arrangements may be devised without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention.