Radar PPR
Radar PPR
Radar PPR
20
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
National Conference “Electronics, Signals, Communication and Optimization" (NCESCO 2015)
The GTI model further allows for separate inputs of average λ Is the wavelength
wave height and wind velocity, but the quantitative basis for
this generalization has not been presented. The significant If all of the incident radar energy on the target were reflected
wave height is defined as the average value of the 1/3 highest equally in all directions, then the radar cross section would be
peak-to-trough waves. A good fit is provided by the equal to the target's cross-sectional area as seen by the
expression transmitter. In practice, some energy is absorbed and the
reflected energy is not distributed equally in all directions.
ℎ1 = 1.6ℎ𝑎𝑣 = 0.049. 𝑆𝑆 2.6 (2) Practically, RCS of the received signal is calculated using
3
various methods as given below,
The agreement considered in equation (2) at sea state (SS) 4
and above is reasonably good, but for sea states of 3 and Finite difference-time domain method (FD-TD):In this method
below large discrepancies are noted. we solve Differential form of Maxwell’s equations for exact
fields.
2.1.2 NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) model Method of Moments (MoM) :Solve integral form of Maxwell’s
NRL is a research laboratory for the United States Navy and equations for exact currents.
the United States Marine Corps.
Geometrical Optics (GO):Current Contribution Assumed to
NRL model for sea clutter [3] is developed by Vilhelm Vanish Except at Isolated Specular Points.
Gregers-Hansen and Rashmi Mittal from Naval Research
Laboratory to overcome the defects of GTI model. In this Geometrical Theory of Diffraction (GTD):Geometrical Optics
model, the reflectivities for various sea states are calculated with Added Edge Current Contribution.
for different sea states and polarization at low grazing angles.
Physical Optics (PO):Currents Approximated by Tangent
2.1.3 Hybrid model Plane Method.
Hybrid model was introduced in an attempt to account for the Physical Theory of Diffraction (PTD):Physical Optics with
effects of the evaporation duct. This model combines Added Edge Current Contribution.
elements of the GTI model with new empirical equations.
Comparison of Hybrid model with Nathanson tables show 2.3 NRL Sea clutter model
some improvement over the GTI model for vertical NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) model [3] is the best fit for
polarization [3] but the average error is still large. clutter modeling as it is applicable for all the sea states unlike
GTI, HYBRID and TSC models. Using this NRL model the
2.1.4 TSC (Technology Service Corporation) reflectivity of the surface is calculated by mathematical
model methods using which RCS is calculated and this result is
The Hybrid model is not valid for sea state 0. Finally, a model compared with the experimental result to identify the target or
developed by the Technology Service Corporation (TSC) was clutter. For the known grazing angle (α) and the transmitted
included in a commercial radar performance evaluation signal frequency (f), the reflectivity (𝜎 0 )for both horizontal
software package. This is more complete model including all and vertical polarization is calculated as
the parameters and is also valid for sea state 0 [13].
𝑐3 + 𝑐4 𝛼 log10 𝑓
In this paper, for modeling sea clutter, Nathanson’s tables [3] 𝜎 0 = 𝑐1 + 𝑐2 log10 sin 𝛼 +
1 + 𝑐5 𝛼 + 𝑐6 𝑆𝑆
are considered as reference. The GTI model for sea clutter
1
proposed in 1978 underestimates sea clutter reflectivity at sea +𝑐7 (1 + 𝑆𝑆)2+𝑐 8 𝛼 +𝑐 9 𝑆𝑆 (4)
states up to 3 compared to experimental data. Radar which is
placed near the sea, the grazing angle or look angle will be Here, SS represents the different sea state classification based
very low. Since, NRL model matches these Nathanson’s on the wind speed [3] as shown in table 2. Similarly, c1 - c9
tables up to a maximum error of 2db for grazing angles 0.1 O to are the polarization constants whose horizontal and vertical
10O, NRL model is the best fit to model the sea clutter for low polarization values are given in table 1.
grazing angles.
Table1. Constants for horizontal and vertical
2.2 Radar Cross Section polarizations- curtesy[3]
The size and ability of a target to reflect radar energy can be POLARIZATION
summarized into a single term, known as the radar cross-
section (𝜎𝑐 ), which has units of m²and is expressed in dbm2. CONSTANT HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
This unit shows that the radar cross section is an area. RCS C1 -72.76 -48.56
calculation for different shapes of the targets is explained in
reference [11]. It is calculated based on the range, grazing C2 21.11 26.30
angle and the power received from the target. In this paper C3 24.78 29.05
RCS is calculated from the basic radar range equation [8]
C4 4.917 -0.5183
4 𝑃𝑠 𝐺 2 𝜆 2 𝜎𝑐
𝑅= (3) C5 0.6216 1.057
𝑃𝐸 (4𝜋)3
C6 -0.02949 0.04839
Where,
C7 26.19 21.37
𝜎𝑐 Is the Radar Cross Section (RCS)
C8 0.09345 0.07466
R Is the range C9 0.05031 0.04623
Ps and PE are transmitted and received powers respectively
G Is the antenna gain and
21
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
National Conference “Electronics, Signals, Communication and Optimization" (NCESCO 2015)
Figure 1. Received power versus time 1 -43.3486 -38.4598 -35.132 -29.56 -26.36 -24.39
22
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
National Conference “Electronics, Signals, Communication and Optimization" (NCESCO 2015)
23
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
National Conference “Electronics, Signals, Communication and Optimization" (NCESCO 2015)
a target returns. Figure (5) shows the final detected target after ratio based T2TA in multi radar data fusion”, Journal of
removal of the clutter. Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, pp.
195-201, Vol 34, No 2, 31st December 2011.
[5] F.E.Nathanson, J.P.Reilly, and M.Cohen. Radar Design
Principles, 2ed, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991.
[6] M.M.Horst, et al, "Radar sea clutter model", Int. IEEE
AP/S UR Symposium, pp. 6-10, College Park, MD, 1978.
[7] K.D.Ward, R.J.A.Tough, and S.Watts. “Sea Clutter,
Scattering the K-Distribution and Radar Performance,”
Institution of Engineering and Technology, 2006.
[8] J.D.Fontana, Capt, USN and R.M.Hillyer. “Specification
for a standard Radar sea clutter,” Naval oceans systems
center, SanDiego, 1990.
Figure5. Final detected target after removing the clutter [9] Horst, M. M., F. B. Dyer, and M. T. Tuley, “Radar Sea
Clutter Model,” Inter.Confer. On Ant. and Prop., IEE
5. CONCLUSION Conf. Pub. No. 169, Pts. 1 and 2, London, 1978.
The sea clutter is modeled using NRL model taking
reflectivity as the main parameter. The reflectivity for [10] R. N. Trebits and B. Perry, Multi frequency Radar Sea
different sea states and grazing angles is calculated and the Backscatter Data Reduction, Georgia Institute of
dependency of reflectivity is shown. RCS is calculated using Technology, Final Technical Report, GIT/EESA-2717,
obtained reflectivities. The transmitted cosine signal with a June 1981Sept. 1982.)
rectangular pulse is generated and the received signal is
synthesized which is a composite of target signal, clutter [11] M. Skolnik (Ed), Radar handbook, McGraw Hill, 1970.
signal and the noise signal. The concept of range resolution is [12] J.P.Reilly and G.D.Dockery, "Influence of evaporation
used to differentiate target and clutter on calculating the ducts on radarSea return", IEE Proceedings Pt.F, Vol.
received power and fixing a threshold. This model is more 137, No.2, pp. 80-88, April 1990.
efficient at low grazing angles. Whenever the wind speed is
more than about 40kt, peculiarities and uncertainties in the [13] I.Antipov, "Simulation of Sea Clutter Returns", Defence
generation of surface roughness begin to emerge more Science and Technology Organization`, Department of
strongly. Therefore, at sea state more than 6, when the grazing Defence, Australia, Report No.DSTO-TR-0679, June
angle is high, the reflectivity cannot be found using NRL 1999.
model. Thus, other models like GTI, Hybrid and TSC models [14] V. G. Borkar, A. Ghosh, R. K. Singh and N. Chourasia,
are used to calculate the reflectivity of sea surface. “Radar Cross-Section Measurement Techniques”,
Defence Science Journal, Vol. 60, No. 2, March 2010,
6. REFERENCES pp.204-212.
[1] Skolnik, M.I. Introduction to Radar Systems, 3rd edition,
Tata McGraw-Hill, 2003. [15] H. Rohling, “Radar CFAR thresholding in clutter and
multiple target situations”, IEEE transactions on
[2] Blasch, E. P. and Mike Hensel, “Fusion of Distributions Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. AES-19, pp.
for Radar Clutter Modeling,” Air Force Research Lab, 608-621, 1983.
2241 Avionics Sir, WPAFB, OH 45433, IEEE , August
2002. [16] T. P. Leonard, et al, “A comparison of sea clutter
models”, Radar 2002, pp. 429-433, London, UK,
[3] Vilhelm Gregers, Hansen and Rashmi Mittal, “An October 15, 2002.
empirical sea clutter model for low grazing angles,”
Radar Conference, pp. 1-5, IEEE, 4-8 May, 2009.
[4] J.Valarmathi, D.S Emmanuel, S. Christopher “Fusion
using quasilinearilization technique for the likelihood
IJCATM : www.ijcaonline.org 24