In an
antenna array the directivity is a complicated calculation in the general case. For a linear array the directivity will always be less than or equal to the number of elements. For a
standard linear array (SLA), where the element spacing is \frac{\lambda}{2}, the directivity is equal to the inverse of the square of the 2-norm of the array weight vector, under the assumption that the weight vector is normalized such that its sum is unity. :D_\text{SLA} = {1 \over \vec{w}^\textsf{H} \vec{w}} \leq N In the case of a uniformly weighted (un-tapered) SLA, this reduces to simply N, the number of array elements. For a planar array, the computation of directivity is more complicated and requires consideration of the positions of each array element with respect to all the others and with respect to wavelength. For a planar rectangular or hexagonally spaced array with non-isotropic elements, the maximum directivity can be estimated using the universal ratio of effective aperture to directivity, \frac{\lambda^2}{4\pi}, :D = A_e{4{\pi} \over \lambda^2} = Ndx\, dy\, \eta {4\pi \over \lambda^2} where dx and dy are the element spacings in the x and y dimensions and \eta is the "illumination efficiency" of the array that accounts for tapering and spacing of the elements in the array. For an un-tapered array with elements at less than \lambda spacing, \eta = 1. Note that for an un-tapered standard rectangular array (SRA), where dx = dy = {\lambda \over 2}, this reduces to D \approx N\pi. For an un-tapered standard rectangular array (SRA), where dx = dy = \lambda, this reduces to a maximum value of D_\text{max} \approx 4N\pi. The directivity of a planar array is the product of the
array gain, and the directivity of an element (assuming all of the elements are identical) only in the limit as element spacing becomes much larger than lambda. In the case of a sparse array, where element spacing >\lambda, \eta is reduced because the array is not uniformly illuminated. There is a physically intuitive reason for this relationship; essentially there are a limited number of photons per unit area to be captured by the individual antennas. Placing two high gain antennas very close to each other (less than a wavelength) does not buy twice the gain, for example. Conversely, if the antenna are more than a wavelength apart, there are photons that fall between the elements and are not collected at all. This is why the physical aperture size must be taken into account. Let's assume a 16×16 un-tapered standard rectangular array (which means that elements are spaced at \frac{\lambda}{2}.) The array gain is 10\log_{10}(N) = 10\log_{10}(256) = 24.1dB. If the array were tapered, this value would go down. The directivity, assuming isotropic elements, is 25.9dBi. Now assume elements with 9.0dBi directivity. The directivity is not 33.1dBi, but rather is only 29.2dBi. The reason for this is that the effective aperture of the individual elements limits their directivity. So, D = A_e \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = Ndx\, dy\, \eta \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = N \frac{\lambda}{2} \frac{\lambda}{2} \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = N\pi. Note, in this case \eta = 1 because the array is un-tapered. Why the slight difference from 10\log_{10}(N\pi) ={} 29.05 dBi? The elements around the edge of the array aren't as limited in their effective aperture as are the majority of elements. Now let's move the array elements to \lambda spacing. From the above formula, we expect the directivity to peak at D = A_e \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = Ndx\, dy\, \eta \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = N\lambda\, \lambda\, \frac{4\pi}{\lambda^2} = 4N\pi. The actual result is 34.6380 dBi, just shy of the ideal 35.0745 dBi we expected. Why the difference from the ideal? If the spacing in the x and y dimensions is \lambda, then the spacing along the diagonals is \lambda \sqrt{2}, thus creating tiny regions in the overall array where photons are missed, leading to \eta . Now go to 10 \lambda spacing. The result now should converge to N times the element gain, or 10\log_{10}(N) + 9 dBi = 33.1 dBi. The actual result is in fact, 33.1 dBi. For antenna arrays, the closed form expression for Directivity for progressively phased array of isotropic sources will be given by, : D = \frac {\left(\sum\limits_{n=1}^N I_n\right)^2} {\sum\limits_{m=1}^N \sum\limits_{n=1}^N I_m I_n e^{j(\beta_m - \beta_n)}\operatorname{sinc}\big(2r_{mn}\big)} where, : N is the total number of elements on the aperture; : \{x_n, y_n, z_n\} represents the location of elements in Cartesian co-ordinate system; : I_n e^{j\beta_n} is the complex excitation coefficient of the n^\textrm{th}-element; : \beta_n = -k(x_n \sin\theta_\tau \cos\phi_\tau + y_n\sin\theta_\tau \sin\phi_\tau + z_n\cos\theta_\tau) is the phase component (progressive phasing); : k = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} is the wavenumber; : \{\theta_\tau, \phi_\tau\} is the angular location of the far-field target; : r_{mn} = \sqrt{(x_m - x_n)^2 + (y_m - y_n)^2 + (z_m - z_n)^2} is the Euclidean distance between the m^\textrm{th} and n^\textrm{th} element on the aperture, and : \operatorname{sinc}(x) = \frac{1}{\pi x}\sin(\pi x) Further studies on directivity expressions for various cases, like if the sources are omnidirectional (even in the array environment) like if the prototype element-pattern takes the form \sin^\mu \theta\cos^\nu \theta,\; \left(\mu > -1, \nu > -\frac{1}{2}\right), and not restricting to progressive phasing can be done from. ==Relation to beam width==