Radar Techniques Using Array Antennas (FEE Rada...

LINK --->>> https://tinurll.com/2tD9Ao

Bell Labs proposed replacing the Nike Zeus radars with a phased array system in 1960, and was given the go-ahead for development in June 1961. The result was the Zeus Multi-function Array Radar (ZMAR), an early example of an active electronically steered array radar system.[1] ZMAR became MAR when the Zeus program ended in favor of the Nike-X system in 1963. The MAR (Multi-function Array Radar) was made of a large number of small antennas, each one connected to a separate computer-controlled transmitter or receiver. Using a variety of beamforming and signal processing steps, a single MAR was able to perform long-distance detection, track generation, discrimination of warheads from decoys, and tracking of the outbound interceptor missiles.[2]

Starting in the 1960s new solid-state devices capable of delaying the transmitter signal in a controlled way were introduced. That led to the first practical large-scale passive electronically scanned array (PESA), or simply phased array radar. PESAs took a signal from a single source, split it into hundreds of paths, selectively delayed some of them, and sent them to individual antennas. The radio signals from the separate antennas overlapped in space, and the interference patterns between the individual signals were controlled to reinforce the signal in certain directions, and mute it in all others. The delays could be easily controlled electronically, allowing the beam to be steered very quickly without moving the antenna. A PESA can scan a volume of space much quicker than a traditional mechanical system. Additionally, thanks to progress in electronics, PESAs added the ability to produce several active beams, allowing them to continue scanning the sky while at the same time focusing smaller beams on certain targets for tracking or guiding semi-active radar homing missiles. PESAs quickly became widespread on ships and large fixed emplacements in the 1960s, followed by airborne sensors as the electronics shrank.

This technique is much less useful against a radar with a frequency-agile (solid state) transmitter. Since the AESA (or PESA) can change its frequency with every pulse (except when using doppler filtering), and generally does so using a random sequence, integrating over time does not help pull the signal out of the background noise. Moreover, a radar may be designed to extend the duration of the pulse and lower its peak power. An AESA or modern PESA will often have the capability to alter these parameters during operation. This makes no difference to the total energy reflected by the target but makes the detection of the pulse by an RWR system less likely.[11] Nor does the AESA have any sort of fixed pulse repetition frequency, which can also be varied and thus hide any periodic brightening across the entire spectrum. Older generation RWRs are essentially useless against AESA radars, which is why AESAs are also known as low probability of intercept radars. Modern RWRs must be made highly sensitive (small angles and bandwidths for individual antennas, low transmission loss and noise)[11] and add successive pulses through time-frequency processing to achieve useful detection rates.[12]

Since each element in an AESA is a powerful radio receiver, active arrays have many roles besides traditional radar. One use is to dedicate several of the elements to reception of common radar signals, eliminating the need for a separate radar warning receiver. The same basic concept can be used to provide traditional radio support, and with some elements also broadcasting, form a very high bandwidth data link. The F-35 uses this mechanism to send sensor data between aircraft in order to provide a synthetic picture of higher resolution and range than any one radar could generate. In 2007, tests by Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and L-3 Communications enabled the AESA system of a Raptor to act like a WiFi access point, able to transmit data at 548 megabits per second and receive at gigabit speed; this is far faster than the Link 16 system used by US and allied aircraft, which transfers data at just over 1 Mbit/s.[13] To achieve these high data rates requires a highly directional antenna which AESA provides but which precludes reception by other units not within the antennas beamwidth, whereas like most Wi-Fi designs, Link-16 transmits its signal omni-directionally to ensure all units within range can receive the data.

Given all required funding and development support, the team produced working radar systems in 1935 and began deployment. By 1936, the first five Chain Home (CH) systems were operational and by 1940 stretched across the entire UK including Northern Ireland. Even by standards of the era, CH was crude; instead of broadcasting and receiving from an aimed antenna, CH broadcast a signal floodlighting the entire area in front of it, and then used one of Watson-Watt's own radio direction finders to determine the direction of the returned echoes. This fact meant CH transmitters had to be much more powerful and have better antennas than competing systems but allowed its rapid introduction using existing technologies.

Mainlobe jamming can generally only be reduced by narrowing the mainlobe solid angle and cannot fully be eliminated when directly facing a jammer which uses the same frequency and polarization as the radar. Sidelobe jamming can be overcome by reducing receiving sidelobes in the radar antenna design and by using an omnidirectional antenna to detect and disregard non-mainlobe signals. Other anti-jamming techniques are frequency hopping and polarization.

The two techniques outlined above both have their disadvantages. The pulse timing technique has an inherent tradeoff in that the accuracy of the distance measurement is inversely related to the length of the pulse, while the energy, and thus direction range, is directly related. Increasing power for longer range while maintaining accuracy demands extremely high peak power, with 1960s early warning radars often operating in the tens of megawatts. The continuous wave methods spread this energy out in time and thus require much lower peak power compared to pulse techniques, but requires some method of allowing the sent and received signals to operate at the same time, often demanding two separate antennas.

The alternate purpose is \"look-down/shoot-down\" capability required to improve military air combat survivability. Pulse-Doppler is also used for ground based surveillance radar required to defend personnel and vehicles.[44][45] Pulse-doppler signal processing increases the maximum detection distance using less radiation close to aircraft pilots, shipboard personnel, infantry, and artillery. Reflections from terrain, water, and weather produce signals much larger than aircraft and missiles, which allows fast moving vehicles to hide using nap-of-the-earth flying techniques and stealth technology to avoid detection until an attack vehicle is too close to destroy. Pulse-Doppler signal processing incorporates more sophisticated electronic filtering that safely eliminates this kind of weakness. This requires the use of medium pulse-repetition frequency with phase coherent hardware that has a large dynamic range. Military applications require medium PRF which prevents range from being determined directly, and range ambiguity resolution processing is required to identify the true range of all reflected signals. Radial movement is usually linked with Doppler frequency to produce a lock signal that cannot be produced by radar jamming signals. Pulse-Doppler signal processing also produces audible signals that can be used for threat identification.[44]

Phased-array interferometry or aperture synthesis techniques, using an array of separate dishes that are phased into a single effective aperture, are not typical for radar applications, although they are widely used in radio astronomy. Because of the thinned array curse, such multiple aperture arrays, when used in transmitters, result in narrow beams at the expense of reducing the total power transmitted to the target. In principle, such techniques could increase spatial resolution, but the lower power means that this is generally not effective.

If using a single antenna, then due to the method (simultaneously transmitting and receiving) the FMCW radar needs a ferrite circulator to separate the transmitting and receiving signals. In the currently used patch antennas, however, the use of separate transmitting and receiving antennas is much cheaper. On a common substrate are placed directly above each other, a transmitting antenna array and a receiving antenna array. The polarization direction is rotated by 180 against each other often. Often is reduced by an additional shielding plate a direct \"crosstalk\" (ie a direct positive feedback between the two antennas). Since the measurement is performed as a frequency difference between the transmitting and receiving signal, the signal which is produced by this direct coupling can be suppressed due to the very small frequency difference.

Multi-target tracking (MTT) generally needs either a Doppler radar network with spatially separated receivers or a single radar equipped with costly phased array antennas. However, Doppler radar networks have high computational complexity, attributed to the multiple receivers in the network. Moreover, array signal processing techniques for phased array radar also increase the computational burden on the processing unit. To resolve this issue, this paper investigates the problem of the detection and tracking of multiple targets in a three-dimensional (3D) Cartesian space based on range and 3D velocity measurements extracted from dual-orthogonal baseline interferometric radar. The contribution of this paper is twofold. First, a nonlinear 3D velocity measurement function, defining the relationship between the state of the target and 3D velocity measurements, is derived. Based on this measurement funct