Final Thesis

[B. Sc. Eng.
Thesis]
Analysis of Target Detection Performance and Reduction of
Interrupting Signals at the Receiver of Coherent MIMO Radar
Using Space Time Adaptive Processing

A. K. M. Tohidur Rahman
(090918)
S. M. M. Hossain Mahmud
(090924)
Tapan Kumar Biswas
(090933)

Electronics and Communication Engineering Discipline
Science, Engineering and Technology School
Khulna University, Khulna-9208
Bangladesh.

November, 2013

The almighty ALLAH blessed us
with a kind-hearted parents
to whom this thesis is dedicated
i

RECOMMENDATION
This thesis is acceptable in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of
Science in Electronics and Communication Engineering, abbreviated as B. Sc. Eng. (ECE)

Approved By

Shakila Naznin
Lecturer
Bangladesh.

Md. Abdul Alim
Assistant Professor
Bangladesh.

Prof. Dr. Eng. Md. Maniruzzaman
Head
Bangladesh.

Supervisor
External Member
Head of the Discipline
ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, we would like to offer our humble thanks to the most gracious and
merciful, almighty God, who actually enabled us to complete this thesis work. Then we are
very much grateful to our parents who gave us moral support and without whom we would
not be able to get the opportunity to study in Khulna University and complete this thesis work
successfully.
We would like to convey our deepest gratitude to our respected supervisor, Shakila Naznin,
Lecturer, ECE Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna, for her thoughtful reviews, continuous
inspiration and guidance throughout the course of study. Without her guidance and support,
we wouldnt have completed this thesis.
We are indeed thankful and very much grateful to our honorable teacher and external
member, Md. Abdul Alim, Assistant Professor, ECE Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna,
for his valuable comments and suggestions during the study period.
We would also like to thank all the teachers and members of ECE discipline for their
effective and fruitful inspiration.
We are also thankful to our all senior and junior brothers and sisters for their kind support.
We express our greatest love and cordial thanks to all of our classmates for their authentic
amities, a sacrificed, kind hearted and helpful mentality in the last four years in Khulna
University, Khulna. We will never forget those moments and memories enjoyed and shared
with them.

iii

DECLEARATION
This thesis work is done in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of
Science in Electronics and Communication Engineering, abbreviated as B.Sc. Eng. (ECE).
This work is not yet published in any journal, conference etc. or submitted anywhere for any
degree/diploma. Any information gathered from external sources has been properly
acknowledged by mentioning the authors reference at appropriate place. There are
restrictions on any unauthorized cut, copy and change of this thesis paper without the
permission of the authors.

Authors,

A. K. M. Tohidur Rahman

S. M. M. Hossain Mahmud

Tapan Kumar Biswas

iv

Multiple-inputmultiple-output (MIMO) Radar is advantageous for target detection,
parameters identification, and target classification due to waveform diversity and perspective.
By taking the benefit of spatial diversity, MIMO Radar system performance can be
dramatically enhanced. In this thesis, Space Time Processing (STP) was used to improve the
target detection capability of coherent MIMO Radar. Probability of Detection (PoD) Vs
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) was analyzed for both without and with STC through
simulations. Then a comparison was made to show the better performance with STC. On the
other hand at the receiving end different types of unwanted signals can interrupt the main
signal. In this thesis we also applied Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP) to remove
interrupting signals (noise, clutter and jammer). STAP algorithm forces the Radar to operate
at only one domain at a time: space for beam forming, fast time for matched filtering and
slow time for Doppler processing. STAP uses adaptive arrays that simultaneously process
spatial and temporal data. Analyzing the PoD and reducing interrupting signals to improve
the Radar detection performance by using STAP was the objective of this thesis.

Index Terms- Coherent MIMO Radar, Target detection, Probability of Detection (PoD),
Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP), Space Time Coding (STC).

ABSTRACT
v

CONTENTS
Topics Pages
Recommendation i
Acknowledgements ii
Deceleration iii
Abstract iv
Contents v
List of Figures vii
List of Aberrations viii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1-7
1.1 General Overview 1
1.2 Target Detection Phenomenon of MIMO Radar 2
1.3 Problem Statement 4
1.4 Motivation 5
1.5 Objectives of the Thesis 6
1.6 Organizations of the Thesis 7

CHAPTER 2 LITERATUREREVIEW 9-11
CHAPTER 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 12-32
3.1 Coherent MIMO Radar (MIMO Radar with Collocated
Antennas)
14
3.1.1 Signal Model 15
3.1.2 Detection in Coherent MIMO Radar 16
3.2 Coherent MIMO RADAR with STC Waveforms 17
3.3 Adaptive Signal Processing 19
3.4 The LMS Adaptive Array Processing 20
3.5 Space Time Processing 22
3.6 Space Time Adaptive Processing 24
3.6.1 Signal Only 27
3.6.2 Interference Only 28
3.6.3 Joint Clutter and Jamming Characteristics 29
3.6.4 Signal and Noise Ratio SNR 30
3.6.5 Correlated Interference SINR 30
3.7 Optimum Space-Time adaptive Processing 31

vi

Topics Page
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 33-43
4.1 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO
Radar
34
4.1.1 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO
Radar without Space time processing varying number of
transmitters, M
35
Radar without Space time processing varying number of
receivers, N
35
Radar with Space time processing varying number of
transmitters, M
36
Radar with Space time processing varying number of
receivers, N
37
4.1.5 Comparison of Probability of Detection of Coherent MIMO
Radar between with and without Space time processing
38
4.2 Analysis of Reduction of the 2-D interferences (noise, clutter
and jammer) from the receiving signal at the receiver end of
the Coherent MIMO Radar using STAP (Space Time Adaptive
Processing).
39
4.2.1 Total Return Spectrum before STAP Detection 40
4.2.2 Detection of Target and Jammer by STAP and Removal of
Clutter
41
4.2.3 Detection of Target by STAP, Removal of Clutter and Jammer 42
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS
45
REFERENCES
46
APPENDICES
47-54

vii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 MIMO radar system. 2
Figure 3.1 Clutter Nulling Using Conventional Techniques. 14
Figure 3.2 Coherent MIMO Radar Configuration. 15
Figure 3.3 STC MIMO Radar Configuration. 19
Figure 3.4
Basic adaptive system.
20
Figure 3.5 A linear adaptive array. 21
Figure 3.6 Illustration of a space time beamformer configuration. (T = 1/f
r
). 23
Figure 3.7 Space time data cube. 24
Figure 3.8 Illustration of a STAP array configuration. (T = 1/f
r
). 25
Figure 3.9 The space-time adaptive processing (STAP) typically performed in
one radar coherent processing interval.
26
Figure 3.10 The problem is to detect the target by enhancing radar performance
in this environment of interference.
27
Figure 4.1 Probability of Detection plotted against SNR for Coherent MIMO
Radar without space time processing for variable M and constant N.
38
Figure 4.2 Probability of Detection plotted against SNR for Coherent MIMO
Radar without space time processing at variable N and constant M.
39
Figure 4.3 Probability of Detection plotted against SNR with space time
processed Coherent MIMO Radar varying number of transmitters,
M and constant N.
40
Figure 4.4 Probability of Detection Plotted against SNR for STC Coherent
MIMO Radar at variable N
41
Figure 4.5 Comparison of Probability of Detection between with and without
Space Time Processing.
42
Figure 4.6 Total return spectrum at the receiver end with target, clutter, noise
and jammer, before STAP detection.
43
Figure 4.7 3-D plot of total return spectrum at the receiver end with target,
clutter, noise and jammer, before STAP detection.
43
Figure 4.8 STAP detection; removal of clutter and noise while target & jammer
remains.
44
Figure 4.9 3-D plot of STAP detection; removal of clutter and noise while
target & jammer remains.
44
Figure 4.10 Output of STAP processor. Target remain; jammer and clutter ridge
returns have been removed
45
Figure 4.11 3-D plot of Output of STAP processor. Target remain; jammer and
clutter ridge returns have been removed
46

viii

LIST OF ABBRATIONS
MIMO Multiple Input Multiple Output
PoD Probability of Detection
STAP Space Time Adaptive Processing
RCS Radar Cross Section
EM Electro Magnetic
AoA Angle of Arrival
MTI Moving Target Indication
SNR Signal to Noise Ratio
STC Space Time Code
SIMO Single-Input Multiple-Output
PSD Power Spectral Density
LMS Least Mean Squares
P
fa
Probability of false alarm
CPI Coherent Processing Interval

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Chapter 1: Introduction
1

INTRODUCTION
Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) radar can be broadly defined as a radar system
deploying multiple antennas to simultaneously transmit arbitrary waveforms and utilizing
multiple antennas to receive signals which are then processed jointly. In the case of Coherent
mode in the MIMO radar system the high-integrity high-resolution receiving signal at the
receivers reflecting from targets of potential interest, at aspect angles of interest and possibly
with different stores, flight or assembly configurations are establish. This thesis is devoted to
eliminate the unwanted part (noise, jammer, interference) of the receiving signal and
evaluates the probability of detection at the receiver end of Coherent MIMO Radar using
signal processing algorithms Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP). In this chapter, at first
the general overview part consists with the basics of MIMO Radar and Coherent mode of
MIMO Radar. After that the fundamental of target detection phenomena of MIMO Radar is
introduced. Then the most significant problems are associated in the process of receiving
signal at the receiver end of MIMO Radar systems are mentioned. Motivation and Objectives
of the thesis are presented after the problem statement. At the end of this chapter the overall
organizations of this thesis are presented [1], [2], [3].

1.1 General Overview
MIMO radar has attracted much attention recently due to the additional degrees of freedom
and improvement in performance that offers over conventional single antenna systems.
MIMO Radar uses multiple transmit and multiple receive antennas for transmitting and
receiving signals. These antennas may be closely spaced being in the form of an array or be
widely spaced forming a netted radar like structure [4].
Every antenna element in a MIMO radar system transmits different waveforms. These may
be orthogonal, mutually uncorrelated or simply linearly independent. This is called waveform
diversity and it is a distinguishing property of MIMO radar. Correlation of waveforms may
also be allowed to some degree for some applications and designing mutually orthogonal
waveforms with desired autocorrelation and crosscorrelation to the receiving signal at the
receiver.
MIMO radar has been receiving increasing attention in recent years due to the dramatic
advantages offered by MIMO systems in communications. It is clearly necessary to design
the radar appropriate to the type of measurement that has to be performed, to provide the type
of target signature required. In order to obtain signatures of high integrity, the waveform must
be carefully designed and the radar must support the transmission and reception of the signal
without distortion. The waveform, the associated signal processing, radar phase noise and
dynamic range performance also have to be designed to minimize the effects of clutter. In
MIMO radar systems, it is also implicitly assumed that the independency of transmitted
signals remains unchanged at the receiver after the signals are reflected from the target. To
benefit from this diversity, in every MIMO radar receiver, there are as many matched filters
as the number of transmitted signals. The target returns are passed through these filters
matched to every transmitted signal. If the number of transmitter antenna elements is S
N
and
2

the number of receiver antenna elements is X
M
, there are S
N
X
M
outputs of these matched
filters totally. MIMO radar processes these outputs jointly to decide a target is present or not.
Fig.1.1: MIMO radar system
Coherent MIMO radar uses antenna arrays for transmitting and receiving signals. These
arrays may be co-located and even transmit and receive functions can be performed by the
same array or the arrays may be separated. The separation between the elements may be
uniform or non-uniform. The arrays can be filled or sparse depending on the application type.
But the separation is always small compared to the range extent of the target. Whatever the
separation between the array elements is, the important point in coherent MIMO radar is that
the array elements are close enough so that every element sees the same aspect of the target
i.e. the same radar cross section (RCS). As a result, point target assumption is generally used
in coherent MIMO radar applications. Coherent MIMO radar resembles the phased array
radar because of this deployment scheme of antenna elements. But differently from phased
array radar, every antenna element of Coherent MIMO radar sends different waveforms [2].
Target detection is proposed with signal Processing based only on time delay measurements.
With Coherent mode and signal processing algorithm using STAP switch to high resolution.
Coherent mode to investigate the target with the goal of obtains high resolution beyond
Possible with the radar waveform using phase synchronization of distributed sensors [5].
1.2 Target Detection Phenomenon of MIMO Radar
The basic functions of radar are detection, parameter estimation and tracking. The most
fundamental one among these functions is detection. Detection is the process of determining
whether the received signal is an echo returning from a desired target or consists of noise
only. The success of the detection process is directly related to SNR at the receiver and the
ability of the radar to separate desired target echoes from unwanted reflected signals. So,
various techniques are developed to maximize the SNR at the output of the receiver and to
increase the ability of the radar to separate targets from unwanted echoes and interference.
After the detection process if it turns out that a target really exists, several parameters of the
target like range, velocity and angle of arrival should be estimated from the received signal.
The choice of the radar transmit waveform is a major contributor to the resolution of these
parameters. After localization of a target, radar can provide a targets trajectory and track it
by predicting where it will be in the future by observing the target over time and using
3

dedicated filters. Some types of radar can perform more specialized tasks in addition to these
basic functions.
Here considerations of the Coherent MIMO radar scheme that can deal with multiple targets.
Similar to some of the mentioned MIMO radar approaches; linearly independent waveforms
are transmitted simultaneously via multiple antennas. Due to the different phase shifts
associated with the different propagation paths from the transmitting antennas to targets,
these independent waveforms are linearly combined at the targets with different phase
factors. Detection of the presence of reflecting targets, which is the most fundamental
function of the MIMO radar system.
To accomplish this task, EM waveform is transmitted by the transmitter of MIMO Radar and
it will be reflected by targets if they are present. The function of a detector attached with the
receiver of the MIMO Radar is to decide whether the received signal is the reflected echo in
noise (targets exist) or noise only (no target). If targets are detected, one may be interested in
determining their characteristics, which leads to the second task of radar. Extraction of
information about targets from the received signals, the MIMO Radar receiver measures the
echoes reflected by the target, and several parameters of the target can be estimated by
observing a series of measurements as a function of position, time, and frequency. Some of
the most important parameters of a target being illuminated by the MIMO Radar system are
Range, Angle and Velocity of the target of interest.
Range is the distance between the radar system and the target. One approach to estimate the
range is to transmit a short pulse and measure the time difference between the transmission
and the reception of the echo signal. Another method is to transmit a signal whose frequency
changes with time, and then measure the difference in frequency by comparing the frequency
of the received signal to the one currently being emitted, which gives the time difference and
thus the range. In the MIMO Radar system both method is applied and this depend on the
target individuality.
The angle information, such as angle of arrival (AoA), indicates the direction of the target
with respect to the radar system, and it specifies the exact target location when combined
together with the range. In the MIMO Radar the target direction finding problem is usually
solved by processing the signals impinging on an antenna array, i.e., spatial samples of the
echo signal reflected by the target.
Measuring the velocity of targets is the main objective of several radar systems, such as the
police speed radar. The velocity information is also used in a moving target indication(MTI)
radar to separate the moving target echoes from the stationary clutter, and the latter is
unwanted and can be very strong in many cases. In the MIMO Radar the target motion
relative to the radar system results in the Doppler Effect, i.e., frequency shift in the echo
signal. The Doppler frequency can be estimated from the received echoes and consequently
the velocity can be known [3], [6], [7].

4

1.3 Problem Statement
High probability of detection (PoD) is very important for locating the target with high
accuracy. It can also vary with environment. As the radar communication is a wireless
communication many problems can arise. Many undesired signals like (noise, clutter and
jammer) can interrupt the main target reflected signals. Noise in the MIMO scheme may be
generated by the different types of constraint such as multiple reflections on local scatters
which appears in the radar receiver. Noise is always present and normally modeled as a
random addition to the desired echo signal. Clutter is defined as unwanted radar echoes,
including reflections from ground, sea, clouds, rain, snow flakes, trees, birds, insects, and
man-made structures, etc. It is an important task of the radar to distinguish clutter from the
echo signals reflected by targets.. In some scenarios, clutter could be so strong that the targets
are difficult or even impossible to be detected. Jamming arises from signals emitted by
intentional hostile sources or unintentional friendly sources which use the same frequency
range as the MIMO radar does. Jamming is considered as an active interference since it is
transmitted by devices outside the MIMO radar and is generally independent of the MIMO
radar signals. Jamming can severely degrade the performances of radar by either masking real
targets with high power noise (confusion), or producing false signals which appear as echoes
from real targets (deception). Interrupting signals (noise, clutter and jammer) reduces
probability of detection as well as signal to noise ratio (SNR).So performance of MIMO radar
degrades [1], [4], [6], [8].

5

1.4 Motivation
By taking the benefit of spatial diversity, MIMO Radar system performance can be
dramatically enhanced. More specifically, such a gain is determined by the inter element
spacing of the antenna array, the size of the target, and the distance between the antenna array
and the target. Spatial diversity gain is one of the two major benefits realized by MIMO
communication systems, and it is often achieved by transmitting the same signal through
different sub-channels and combining the information at the receiver. Diversity gain is used
to improve the degradation of the performances of MIMO Radar and thus enhance the link
reliability of the system.
The same idea can be exploited in radar scenarios. Common radar targets are in complex
bodies. Large scintillations in the amount of energy reflected by a complex target can occur
with small changes in the illuminating direction. The underlying idea of diversity gain in
MIMO radar is that any individual view of the target might have a small return with a
significant probability. At the receiver end the resultant signal were interrupted with an
excessive amount of unwanted signals such as Noise, Clutter and Jammer. All these
unwanted signals can interrupt the desired signal and the probability of detection can
decrease.
The target deep fading or scintillation problem degrades the performance of Coherent MIMO
Radar is overcame by taking the advantage of STAP. By applying the algorithm of coherent
MIMO radar can be eliminated Noise, clutter and Jammer and the probability of target
detection as well as the diversity gain can be improves.

6

1.5 Objectives of the Thesis
In this thesis, Coherent MIMO Radar is investigated. Space Time Processing (STP) is being
used in the case of Coherent MIMO Radar for increasing the PoD. STAP is also being used
for reducing the interrupted signals from the desired signal. By using STP, probability of
detection increased with the transmission of space time coded waveforms at the transmitters
of the radar. Discussion about radar, normally considered the processes of beam forming,
matched filtering and Doppler processing separately. In the STAP, this algorithm forcing the
radar to operate on only one domain at a time: space for beam forming, fast time for matched
filtering and slow time for Doppler processing.
The main objective of this thesis is to analyze Probabilities of target detection performances
for Coherent MIMO Radar using STP and reducing the Noise, Clutter and Jammer at the
receiver end using Space Time Adaptive Processing algorithm.

7

1.6 Organizations of the Thesis
This thesis paper consists of five chapters. The rest of this thesis paper has been arranged as:
+ Chapter 2: The aim of this chapter is to review and critically discuss all the books and
papers which are studied to complete this thesis.
+ Chapter 3: The materials and methods of our thesis are in this chapter. This chapter
describes the Coherent mode of MIMO Radar, Space Time Adaptive Processing
algorithm for eliminating the unwanted signal (Noise, Clutter and Jammer) and
mathematical derivation related to STAP, analysis of STC, Mathematical expression
for Coherent MIMO Radar and the analysis of probability of detection performances
based on the Coherent MIMO Radar scheme.
+ Chapter 4: This chapter contains the results and discussions of our whole thesis.
Analysis of PoDs of Coherent MIMO radar is given at first with simulations and
graphical representations of interrupting signals reduction are given at next.
+ Chapter 5: This chapter concludes our thesis with plans for future research.

CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter 2: Literature Review
9

LITERATURE REVIEW
Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar is a relatively a new term for a radar field
which has been inspired by the MIMO technique in communications. MIMO radar has
multiple transmit channels and multiple receive channels, and the transmit channels can be
separated by waveforms, or time, or frequencies, or polarizations at each receiver. Every
antenna element in a MIMO radar system transmits different waveforms. These may be
orthogonal, mutually uncorrelated or simply linearly independent. This is called waveform
diversity and it is a distinguishing property of MIMO radar. Correlation of waveforms may
also be allowed to some degree for some applications. So designing mutually orthogonal
waveforms with desired autocorrelation and cross correlation properties is one of the ongoing
research areas of MIMO radar. In this thesis mainly described about the Coherent mode
(antenna elements spacing closely) of MIMO Radar and the STAP for increasing the
diversity gain at both transmitting and receiving end. If transmitters of the Coherent MIMO
Radar are transmits space time processed signal then at the receiving end target responses are
detected fast with lower SNR value. The target response is mainly interrupted by the 2-D
unwanted signal (noise, clutter and jammer) associated with receiving signal [2], [5], [9].

This thesis evaluates the probability of detection of Coherent MIMO Radar and reducing the
noise, clutter and jammer at the receiver end using STAP (Space Time Adaptive Processing).
Having completing this thesis many books and papers related to MIMO Radar, Coherent
mode of MIMO Radar, STP (Space Time processing), STAP (Space Time Adaptive
Processing). For simulation, MATLAB help file provides sufficient information and data.
Many researcher are developed the signal processing algorithm for reducing interrupted
signal which are related with receiving signal of Coherent MIMO Radar and are research are
going on. All these books and papers are listed in references. In this chapter the findings of
all the books and papers are provided [10].
MIMO Radar Signal Processing: Edited by JIAN LI and PETRE STOICA
This book covers the fundamental principles of MIMO (Multiple-input multiple-output)
Radar to stimulate new concepts, theories and applications of the topics related with the ideas
over MIMO techniques. This book explains practical signal processing methods for achieving
the performances improvement. Starting with background material on MIMO system and the
basic phenomenon of Radar techniques, the book reviews all possible criteria for MIMO
signal processing. This book analyzes the theory behind MIMO techniques in detail and then
leads to a depth discussion on STAP. The book continues with discussion about the detection
phenomenon of MIMO, cross correlation of signal at the receiver end, various diversity
techniques for improving the performances, target detection and estimation for different
digital signal processing systems. Finally this book has a focus on the merits of the waveform
diversity, using transmit and receive antenna arrays containing elements that are collocated to
improve the radar performance. The last three chapters exploit the diversity, offered by
widely separated transmit and receive antenna elements, to achieve performance gains.

10

From this book chapter 2 [KEITH W. FORSYTHE and DANIEL W. BLISS] describes
briefly about the fundamental concept of MIMO Radar performance evaluation. Chapter
4[JOSEPH TABRIKIAN] provides the conceptual material about performance bounds and
techniques for target localization of MIMO Radars. In chapter 5 [Benjamin Friedlander] the
author evaluates the adaptive signal design for MIMO Radars with problem formulation,
estimation and detection of the resultant signal for better SINR (signal-interference to noise
ratio). MIMO Radar STAP (Space-time Adaptive Processing) and Signal Design phenomena
is proposed at chapter 6 [Chun-Yang Chen and P. P. Vaidyanathan]. Chapter 10 [Antonio De
Maio and Marco Lops] is describes the Space-time Coding for MIMO Radar with the merits
of the waveform diversity. This thesis paper eliminating the unwanted signal at the receiver
as well as evaluates the probability of target detection using STC [11].

An Overview of Detection in MIMO Radar by Safak Bilgi Akdemir
This is the paper about various mode of MIMO Radar are introduced concisely. Chapter 2 of
this paper discusses the differential mode of MIMO Radar where the coherent mode is
evaluated precisely. A detailed concept about the Coherent MIMO Radar is proposed in this
paper with antenna formation of specific Coherent mode. It also deals with the improvement
that coherent MIMO offer, signal model, higher resolution, parameter identification,
applications of adaptive array techniques of coherent MIMO and target detection
enhancement of coherent MIMO Radar. Here coherent mode is introduced by array patterns
of MIMO with collocated antennas [2].

Fundamentals of Radar Signal Processing by Mark A. Richard
This book is intended to bring in the perception about radar signal model including radar
cross-section, clutter to signal ratio, temporal and special correlation of clutter and jammer
and noise model considering SNR. This book is analyzed the beamforming theory of the
MIMO Radar with STAP (Space Time Adaptive Processing). There is a complete discussion
about the STAP with algorithm to establish this phenomenon. STAP is a Time varying single
domain system where space is for beamforming, fast time is for matched filtering and slow
time for Doppler shift.

In chapter 2 of this book the compulsory of signal model in Coherent MIMO Radar is
presented to express the statistical description of Radar cross section, actions of clutter with
the receiving signal, temporal and spatial correlation of clutter and jammer and noise model
with signal to noise ratio. STAP is basically articulated for the Radar waveforms without
unwanted signal with desire signal at the receiver, matched filtering and Doppler shift is the
fundamental component of STAP is briefly appraise at the chapter 4. The significant part of
the thesis, expressed the STAP with proper adaptive beamforming preprocessing, space time
signal modeling with space time signal environment, STAP matrix and adaptive match
filtering are concisely describe at the chapter 9 of this book [8].

11

Space Time Adaptive Processing for Radar by J. R. Guerci
This book has proposed basic fundamentals of the STAP for the MIMO system. In this book
both the optimum and adaptive, spatial (angle) and temporal (doppler) processing are
introduced. Many of the key concepts and issues of STAP can be readily grasped easily by
examining the 1-D constituent angle and Doppler processing chains. STAP is
multidimensional adaptive filtering of clutter and jamming in the receiving signal where
clutter returns manifest themselves as fully 2-D (non-factorable) structures due to the motion-
induced doppler spreading effect described in this book.

From this book, chapter 2 through chapter 5 was very helpful. Chapter 2 of this book
generously brings the basic phenomenon of the optimum temporal (doppler/Pulse) processing
besides at the angle of arrival, optimum spatial (angle) beamforming and Adaptive 1-D
Processing of STAP. In chapter 3 the joint of space and time processing are demonstrated.
Some very important factors are affected STAP such as both angle independent and
dependent channel mismatch; interference subspace leakage effects and antenna array
misalignment are detailed at chapter 4. Methods, Algorithms and Performance of the STAP
in the MIMO systems are provided at the chapter 5 of this book. This book has co-operated a
lot in our thesis [5].

Radar Systems Analysis and Design Using MATLAB by Bassem R.
Mahafza, Ph.D.
This book [8] contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources for
radar system analysis and system design. Its also concentrates on radar fundamentals,
principles, and rigorous mathematical derivations. This book will serve as a valuable
reference to simulate and radar engineering in analyzing and understanding the many issues
associated with radar systems analysis and design [13].

CHAPTER 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Chapter 3: Materials and Methods
13

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Every antenna element in a MIMO radar system transmits different waveforms. These
may be orthogonal, mutually uncorrelated or simply linearly independent. This is called
waveform diversity and it is a distinguishing property of MIMO radar. Correlation of
waveforms may also be allowed to some degree for some applications. So designing
mutually orthogonal waveforms with desired autocorrelation and cross correlation properties
is one of the ongoing research areas of MIMO radar [2].

In the detection problems studied so far, the transmitted signals by MIMO radar are assumed
to be orthogonal and the detectors are developed without including these STAP signals
explicitly. With a slight modification, STAP methods developed originally for the single-
input multiple-output (SIMO) radar (phased array radar) can also be used in MIMO radar.
However, in the MIMO radar, the rank of the jammer-and-clutter subspace becomes very
large, especially the jammer subspace. It affects both the complexity and the convergence of
the STAP algorithm. In this chapter, the clutter space and its rank in the MIMO radar are
explored. It computes the clutter space and utilizes the block diagonal property of the jammer
covariance matrix. Because of fully utilizing the geometry and the structure of the covariance
matrix, the method has very good Signal to Interference plus Noise Ratio (SINR)
performance and low computational complexity.

Figure 3.1 might help in visualizing. It contains a depiction of angle-Doppler space. Each of
the squares corresponds to a particular angle and Doppler. There are N beam positions and M
Doppler cells. The dark square indicates an angle and Doppler that contains clutter. With the
standard processing techniques it is possible to null the clutter by suppressing a beam position
and by suppressing a Doppler cell. The suppressed beam position is denoted by the
crosshatched cells and the suppressed Doppler is denoted by the dotted cells. It can be noted
that in the process of suppressing the clutter cell, system had to suppress other cells. This
happens because separately process of angle and Doppler space. With STAP, simultaneously
process in both angle and Doppler space and suppress only the cell containing the clutter.

Fig 3.1: Clutter Nulling Using Conventional Techniques
14

STAP is the term used to describe adaptive arrays that simultaneously process spatial and
temporal data. The spatial components of the signal are collected using the array sensors
(same as in any array operation) while the temporal components of the signal are generated
using time-delay units of equal intervals behind each array sensor. For this purpose, an array
of size N will have N sub-channels (one behind each senor); within each sub-channel the
signal from the j
th
range bin comprises M pulses interleaved by the radar pulse repetition
interval (T = 1/f
r
) where f
r
is the PRF. The outputs from all M delayed responses are then
summed coherently, and then all N channels are coherently summed to generate the
composite array response. The array input is assumed to be made of target returns, clutter
returns, and interrupting signals (e.g., jammers) returns [5], [6].

3. 1 Coherent MIMO Radar (MIMO Radar with Collocated Antennas)
Coherent MIMO radar uses antenna arrays for transmitting and receiving signals. These
arrays may be co-located and even transmit and receive functions can be performed by the
same array or the arrays may be separated. The separation between the elements may be
uniform or non-uniform. The arrays can be filled or sparse depending on the application type.
But the separation is always small compared to the range extent of the target. An example
deployment of linear arrays of radar antennas of coherent MIMO radar is illustrated in Figure
3.2.

The separation between the array elements is the important point in coherent MIMO radar.
The array elements are close enough so that every element sees the same aspect of the target
Fig 3.2: Coherent MIMO Radar Configurations
15

i.e. the same RCS. As a result, point target assumption is generally used in coherent MIMO
radar applications [1], [2].
Coherent MIMO radar resembles the phased array radar because of this deployment scheme
of antenna elements. But in contrast to phased array radar, every antenna element of Coherent
MIMO radar sends different waveforms.
3. 1. 1 Signal Model
Consider a coherent MIMO radar system that has a transmit and a receive array consisting of
and
elements respectively.
Let
be the baseband signal transmitted by the th transmit antenna and
.
Assuming that the transmitted signals are mutually orthogonal.
Let a stationary complex target be located at
. Also have assumed that the

direction of the target with respect to transmit and receive arrays are and
respectively.
Under the assumption that the propagation is non-dispersive, the signal at the target location
can be written as:

(3.1)
Where
is the carrier frequency of the radar and
represents the time delay

between target and the th transmit antenna. If transmitted signals are narrowband, the sum
of all the transmitted signals at the target location can be represented as:
(3.2)
Where
represents the time delay common to all transmit elements and
represents the
time delay between the target and th transmit antenna.
Defining the
transmit steering vector and transmitted signal vector as

follows:
[

Then
can be written in the vector form as

Where
denotes the baseband signal received by the th receive antenna can be written
as:
(3.3)
16

Where
represents the time delay between target and the th receive antenna and
is a zero mean complex random process which accounts for receiver noise and other
disturbances.
Let
is a complex constant that is proportional to the RCS seen by th receive antenna.

Since the antenna elements in the transmit and receive arrays are closely spaced
and
. So
can be rewritten as

) (3.4)
Then the transmitted signals can be written in the vector form as

(3.5)
Where
received signal vector , receive steering vector
and received
interference vector are defined as
)
]

If a
channel matrix is defined as

(3.6)
Then the received signal can be written as

(3.7)
If this received signal is fed to a bank of matched filters each of which is matched to
,
and the corresponding output is sampled at the time instants , then the output of the matched
filter bank can be written in the vector form as

(3.8)
Where is a
complex vector whose entries correspond to the output of the each

matched filter at every receiver, is a
complex noise vector, and is a

complex vector defined as
[
] (3.9)
Where denotes the Kronecker product.
Note that distribution of each entry of is equal to the distribution of since elements of
and
are on the unit circle.

3.1.2 Detection in Coherent MIMO Radar
Considering a coherent MIMO radar system, that has transmitter and receiver array
consisting of M and N elements respectively.
Then the received signal can be written as

(3.10)

17

Where
denote the discrete time baseband signal transmitted by the transmit

antenna elements.
Where is the input message signal with delay time,
is the total average

transmitted energy and is the noise vector.
The detection problem here can be formulated as binary hypothesis testing problem as
follows:

Where
indicates absence of signal and
indicates presence of signal.

It is well known that the optimum solution to this hypothesis testing problem under Neyman-
Pearson criterion is the Likelihood Ratio Test (LRT). The likelihood ratio test becomes,

To see the performance limit of coherent MIMO radar, the vector become identical and
coherent integration of the received samples becomes possible before detection process. The
modified binary hypothesis testing problem turns in the form,

Where is now a complex number.
The probability of false alarm rate,
can be calculated as,
) (3.10a)
Then
can be written in terms of SNR and probability of false alarm rate as,

) (3.11)
So, the probability of detection does not depend on the number of transmit antennas but
depends only on number of receive antennas and SNR.

3.2 Coherent MIMO RADAR with STC Waveforms
In the detection problems studied so far for the coherent MIMO radar which employs antenna
are close enough are developed without including these space time coded (STC) signals
explicitly. In a STC, transmitted signals are modeled as a train of rectangular pulses n whose
amplitudes are modulated by space time codes and the corresponding detectors are
developed. With this approach, the transmitted signals can be further optimized to a better
given performance metric. The STC Coherent MIMO radar configuration is shown in Fig. 3.3
[4].

Considering a coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms system that has transmit and a
receive array consisting of M and N elements respectively. The received signal is also scaled
18

so that the total received signal increases directly proportional to rectangular pulses. The
resultant signal model for the received signal can be written as

(3.12)
Where,
denote the discrete time baseband signal transmitted by the transmit

antenna elements.
Where the input message signal with delay time is,
is the total average

transmitted energy and
is the noise vector.

The detection problem here can be formulated as binary hypothesis testing problem as
follows:

Where
indicates absence of signal and
indicates presence of signal.

To see the performance limit of coherent MIMO radar, the vector become identical and
coherent integration of the received samples becomes possible before detection process and
is now a complex number. For coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms, from the
definition of SNR for the radar system is

(3.13)
Where n is the numbers of space time coded transmitting pulse.
Then
can be written in terms of SNR and probability of false alarm rate as,
(3.14)
Fig 3.3: STC MIMO Radar Configurations
19

3.3 Adaptive Signal Processing
Adaptive signal processing evolved as a natural evolution from adaptive control techniques of
time-varying systems. Advances in digital processing computation techniques and associated
hardware have facilitated optimized adaptive processing techniques.

Consider the basic adaptive digital system shown in Fig 3.4. The system input is the sequence
x[k] and its output is the sequence y[k]. What differentiates adaptive from non-adaptive
systems is that in adaptive systems the transfer function
is now time varying. The

arrow through the transfer function box is used to indicate adaptive processing (or time
varying transfer function). The sequence d[k] is referred to as the desired response sequence.
The error sequence is the difference between the desired response and the actual response. It
is to be noted that the desired sequence is not completely known; otherwise, if it completely
known, one would not need any adaptive processing to compute it. The definition of this
desired response is dependent on the system-specific requirements.

Many different techniques and algorithms have been developed to minimize the error
sequence. Using one technique over another depends heavily on the operating environment
under consideration. For example, if the input sequence is a stationary random process, then
minimizing the error signal is nothing more than solving the least mean squares problem.
However, in most adaptive processing systems, the input signal is a non-stationary process. In
this section, the least mean squares technique is examined [14].

The least mean squares (LMS) algorithm is the most commonly utilized algorithm in adaptive
processing, primary because of its simplicity. The time-varying transfer function of order L
can be written as a Finite Impulse Response (FIR) filter defined by

(3.15)
The input output relationship is given by the discrete convolution

(3.16)

Fig 3.4: Basic adaptive system.

20

3.4 The LMS Adaptive Array Processing
Consider the LMS adaptive array shown in Fig 3.5. The difference between the reference
signal and the array output constitutes an error signal. The error signal is then used to
adaptively calculate the complex weights, using a predetermined convergence algorithm. The
reference signal is assumed to be an accurate approximation of the desired signal (or desired
array response). This reference signal can be computed using a training sequence or
spreading code, which is supposed to be known at the radar receiver. The format of this
reference signal will vary from one application to another. But in all cases, the reference
signal is assumed to be correlated with the desired signal. An increased amount of this
correlation significantly enhances the accuracy and speed of the convergence algorithm being
used. In this section, the LMS algorithm is applied [15].

In general, the complex envelope of a band pass signal and its corresponding analytical (pre-
envelope) signal can be written using the quadrature component pairs x
I
(t), x
Q
(t). Recall that
the quadrature components are related using the Hilbert transform as follows:

(3.17)
Where
and
are, respectively, the Hilbert transforms of x

I
and x
Q
. A bandpass signal
x(t) can be expressed as follows:

(3.18)
Where is complex envelope. equation 3.18 can be written using equation 3.17 as

(3.19)
Fig 3.5: A linear adaptive array

21

Using this notation, the adaptive array output signal, its reference signal, and the error signal
can also be written respectively using the same notation as

Now the output of the n
th
array input signal as y
n
(t) and assume complex weights given by

(3.20)
It follows that

(3.21)

Taking the Hilbert transform of Eq. (3.21) yields

(3.22)
By using Eq. (3.17) into Eq. (3.22), one gets

(3.23)
The n
th
channel analytic signal is
(3.24)
Substituting Eq. (3.21) and Eq. (3.22) into Eq. (3.23) gives
] (3.25)
Collecting terms yields, using complex notation,

Therefore, the output of the entire adaptive array is

(3.26)
which can be written using vector notation as

(3.27)
where the vectors x and w are given by

The superscript [ ]
t
indicates the transpose operation.
As discussed earlier, one common technique to achieving the MMSE of an LMS algorithm is
to use the steepest descent. Thus, the complex weights in the LMS adaptive array are defined
as,

(3.28)
where is the convergence parameter. The subscript k indicates time samples.
Now the covariance matrix define as the
[

] [
]
And the reference signal correlation vector s is
[
] [

Finally, the complex weights is define as

(3.29)

22

3.5 Space Time Processing
The configuration of a space time beam former is illustrated in Fig. 3.6. In this case, an array
of N sensors and M pulses (interleaved by the radar PRI) comprise the beam former output
for each range bin. The signal output of the n
th
array sensor corresponding to the m
th
pulse
and j
th
range bin is
) {

Where N is the number of sensors or receiver in the array, M is the number of pulses, and J is
the number of range bins being processed.
)
]

In this manner, the space time beam former receives a series of M pulses from each of the N
antenna elements for each of the J range bins. Hence, a data cube of returns is generated, as
illustrated in Fig. 3.7. For this purpose, the data received from the j
th
range bin is made of MN
1 space (or time snapshots). By taking element-1 the array phase reference, then the signal
received by the n
th
antenna element (or sensor) at time t
j
from a far field target whose angle of
arrival can be computed with as
) (
(3.30)
Where,

Where the signal x(t) is

Where f
0
is the radar operating frequency. It follows that

] (
)
[
)
]
(3.31)
where the s
s
() is the spatial steering vector associated with the arrival angle . In this
notation, the subscript s is used to differentiate the spatial steering vector from the temporal
steering vector, which will be defined later
Next, considered that doppler effects due to the target relative motion to the radar is in line of
sight. In this case, the returned signal at sensor-1 due to M pulses is given by
[

]
[
)
]
(3.32)
23

.

Where s
t
(f
d
) is the temporal steering vector for the doppler shift f
d
. Therefore, the composite
return signal from the j
th
range bin (i.e., time t
j
) for a target whose doppler frequency is f
d
and
is located at angle off the array boresight is
(3.33)
where the symbol indicates the Kronecker product and s
t
= s
s
() s
t
(f
d
).
Let A and B denote matrices of dimensions mn and pq, respectively. Then AB is an
(mp) (nq)-dimensional matrix of the form
Fig3.7: Space time data cube.
Fig 3.6: Illustration of a space time beamformer configuration. (T = 1/f
r
)

24

[

Where
denotes the (i, j)th element ofA.

3.6 Space Time Adaptive Processing
To begin talking about STAP techniques we need to establish the math that seems to be used
when discussing STAP. With STAP, the processor design technique involves maximizing the
ratio of signal power to interference plus noise power (SINR) at the output of the processor.
The space time adaptive beamformer is shown in fig 3.8. The output of the STAP
beamformer is now given by,
(3.34)
Where Y
j
was defined in the previous section and W is the adaptive weights matrix (see Fig.
3.8).
Fig 3.8: Illustration of a STAP array configuration. (T = 1/f
r
)

25

The STAP beamforming algorithms involve the application of weights to samples in a signal
processing system. Weight application is computed as a dot product between weight vectors
and sample vectors, where the vectors span the radar channels (these channels are either
independent antenna receivers or elements within a single large antenna). In a conventional
nonadaptive beamforming algorithm the weights are a fixed function of the look direction. In
an adaptive beamforming algorithm the weights are computed from the input training data
and the beam steering vectors. Figure 3.9 shows the STAP processing typically performed in
one radar coherent processing interval (CPI), which consists of L range gates, M pulse-
repetition intervals, and N antenna elements.
STAP requires sampling the radar returns at each element of an antenna array, over a dwell
encompassing several pulse repetition intervals. The output of STAP is a linear combination
or weighted sum of the input signal samples.
- The Adaptive in STAP refers to the fact that STAP weights are computed to reflect
the actual noise, clutter and jamming environment in which the radar finds itself.
- The Space in STAP refers to the fact that the STAP weights (applied to the signal
samples at each of the elements of the antenna array) at one instant of time define an
antenna pattern in space. If there are jammers in the field of view, STAP will adapt
the radar antenna pattern by placing nulls in the directions of those jammers thus
rejecting jammer power.
- The Time in STAP refers to the fact that the STAP weights applied to the signal
samples at one antenna array element over the entire dwell define a system impulse
response and, hence, a system frequency response. The clutter spectrum seen by
Fig 3.9: The space-time adaptive processing (STAP) typically performed in one radar
coherent processing interval.
26

ground based radars typically has a ridge at zero Doppler an can easily processed by
pulse pair processing while the clutter spectrum seen by airborne radars is typically
more complicated due to the combination of platform motion and antenna pattern.
- STAP processing adapts the radar frequency response to the actual clutter spectrum in
which the radar finds itself so that the radar will preferentially admit signal power
while simultaneously rejecting clutter power.
The adaptive weights used by STAP are computed using a clutter plus-noise covariance
matrix estimated from data collected at successive ranges. An accurate estimate of this matrix
can be obtained only if the structure of the clutter spectrum remains unchanged over the
range interval used for the estimation [5].

Fig 3.8 shows the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) resulting from clutter and a single jamming
signal, as a function of angle and doppler frequency. Fig 3.8 also shows the view of the
clutter characteristic from the perspective of azimuth for a given doppler frequency, and the
view of the clutter from the perspective of doppler frequency for a given azimuth. These
views indicate that the problem is two-dimensional in nature because filtering must be
performed in each dimension.

The goal of STAP is straight forward, suppressing the interference and detecting the target.
Figure 3.10 illustrates an example of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) that results from clutter
and a single jamming signal, as a function of angle and doppler frequency. Clutter from all
angles lies on the clutter ridge shown in the figure, whereas the jamming signal from one
angle appears in all doppler frequencies. To suppress the interference and detect the target,
Fig 3.10: The problem is to detect the target by enhancing radar performance in this
environment of interference.
27

the AEW surveillance radar must have high gain at the target angle and doppler frequency, as
well as deep nulls along the clutter and jamming lines. As therefore, the input signal to the
array is assumed to be made of the target returned signal, clutter and interference retuned
signal, and thermal noise.

3.6.1 Signal Only
To start the problem we have considered the antenna problem first. In particular, we have
considered a linear array of N elements. It is assumed that the target is located at an angle of
s
u relative to boresight. From linear array theory we can write the output of the linear array
as
(3.35)
If we define
[
] and
(3.36)
we can write
as
(3.37)
Where the superscript H denotes Hermetian, or conjugate-transpose of the vector.
In STAP, we have to choose w so as to maximize
subject to the constraint that the norm

of w remain finite. In equation form we want to solve the problem
|

Subject to

To solve this problem we invoke one of the Cauchy-Schwarz inequalities. Specifically, if w
and
are column vectors then

|

with equality when

where k is an arbitrary constant. If we apply this to our problem with 1 k = we get the
known antenna solution of

[

28

It can be noted that if we replace
with
( ) u s , allow u

to vary from 2 t to and
compute
|
(3.38)
we get the radiation pattern of the linear array. This pattern will have a peak at and a
shape.

3.6.2 Interference Only
To extend this idea to adaptive processing we next want to consider the case where the input
to each antenna element is only noise and clutter. Following the pattern from above, we can
write the noise voltage at the output of the summer as

(3.39)

where

If we assume that is zero-mean and uncorrelated across the elements of the array we can
write
(3.40)
Since the noise is a random variable, we can write the noise power at the output of the
summer as
(3.41)
In the above
is termed the interference (receiver noise only in this case) covariance

matrix.
And the total space-time clutter return from a given iso-range is thus an NM-dimensional
random vector
of the form

(3.42)
Where
is a complex scalar random vector that accounts for the amplitude and phase of the
t
th
clutter patch, and N
c
is the total number of clutter patches in the iso-range ring. However,
due to the finite spatial and temporal resolution (or bandwidth) of the radar, this
approximation is accurate provided that N
c
and the corresponding clutter patches are chosen
properly.
Now the above discussion the resulting NM-dimensional space-time clutter covariance matrix
is given by
]
The total space-time covariance matrix
, due to both clutter and receiver

noise, is of the form

(3.42)
2 t
s
u u =
sin sin Nx x
0
1
1 N
n
n
n

(
(
(
=
(
(

n
n
29

where it is assumed that clutter is uncorrelated with receiver noise. The clutter-to-noise
ratio (CNR) is defined as the ratio of the clutter power to the receiver noise power on a
single element and a single pulse; that is,

(3.43)
where the first diagonal element of Rc was arbitrarily chosen since each channel is
assumed to have the same receiver noise level and elemental antenna pattern.
We are now in a position to examine the space-time, or equivalently, the angle-Doppler
structure of R. One method for characterizing the clutter is by examining the 2-D (angle-
Doppler) power spectrum corresponding to R. The so-called Fourier-based power
spectral density (psd) is the 2-D positive function defined as

(3.43a)
Where
is the NM-dimensional target steering vector specifying the normalized

doppler and angle of interest and R is the total interference covariance matrix. Equation
(3.45a) can be interpreted as the expected value of the 2-D discrete Fourier transform
of the total clutter plus noise signal out of the space-time beamformer that is,

) |
)|
(3.44)
Where
is the received NM-dimensional total clutter-plus-noise vector RV.

3.6.3 Joint Clutter and Jamming Characteristics
If clutter and jamming are both present, the total space-time interference covariance matrix
has the form

(3.45)
Where it is assumed that the jamming is uncorrelated with clutter and receiver noise.
Assuming that the jammer signal is uncorrelated from pulse-to-pulse, the off-diagonal block
terms (corresponding to temporal cross correlation) are null matrices. Thus, the NM-
dimensional jammer-only covariance
has the following block-diagonal form:

=
[
(3.45a)
Where is used to indicate that the off block diagonal entries are zero. Since the rank of a
block-diagonal matrix is equal to the sum of the ranks of the constituent blocks, we see that
the rank of R
J
is given by
{
(3.45b)
For example, if there are three uncorrelated noise jammers, and M=16, the rank of R
J
is 3
16=48. If N=16, the fraction of the total available observation space occupied by the
30

jammers is 48256=3/16, which is precisely the same ratio if spatial-only processing is
performed (NJ =3, N=16). In other words, there is no advantage to using space-time
processing against conventional noise jammers spatial-only processing will suffice.

3.6.4 Signal and Noise Ratio SNR
With this we can write the SNR at the output of the summer as

(3.46)
Now the signal to noise ratio is

(3.47)
If we recognize as a scalar constant that we force to be non-zero and finite, we can
again invoke the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality to maximize by maximizing |
.
We point out that the above development is analogous to the derivation of the matched filter
in waveform theory. It also leads to the same result. That is, the filter that maximizes SNR
is matched to the signal.

3.6.5 Correlated Interference SINR
We now have considered the case where the interference is correlated across the array. This
interference could be clutter or jammers. The subscript n is used to represent the n
th

interference source (which we will need shortly when we consider multiple interference
sources).
We write the interference power (from the K interference sources) as
(3.48)
Now, we get the total interference power as
(3.49)
With the above, the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) at the output of the
summer is given by

(3.50)
The objective of the STAP algorithm is to maximize the SINR. To do this via the Cauchy-
Schwarz inequality we need to manipulate Equation (3.46). We start by noting that, because
of the receiver noise,
C
will be positive definitely. This means that
R
1/2
is real and that
R-
1/2

exists, and is also real.
This is of the same form as Equation (3.43). With this we can state that the SINR is
maximized when
)
If we let and substitute for
and
) we get the solution

(3.51)
The net effect of the above equation is that the antenna weights , are selected to place the
main beam on the target and simultaneously attempt to place nulls at the angular locations of
the interference sources. We will demonstrate this through an example. Before doing so, we
2
w
SNR
1 k =
w
31

note that a critical part of this development is the fact that the interference consists of both
receiver noise and other interference sources such as clutter or jammers. The fact that we
have included receiver noise is what makes the
C
matrix positive definite, and more
importantly, non-singular. Without this,
would not exist and we would need to use

another approach for finding the weights . One of the common approaches is to use a mean-
squared criterion such as least-mean-squared estimation or pseudo inverse. Both of these
approaches are beyond the scope of this course [5].

3.7 Optimum Space-Time adaptive Processing
The goal of space time adaptive processing (STAP) is to find a linear combination of the
extracted signals so that the SINR can be maximized. Thus the target signal can be extracted
from the interferences, clutter, and noise to perform the detection. We next turn our attention
to deriving the optimal space-time beamformer for rejecting both clutter and jamming.
Consider the space-time linear beamformer of Figure 3.6, consisting of N identical antenna
elements (spatial DoFs) and MPRI time taps (temporal DoFs). Analogous to the 1-D
beamformer of Figure 3.7, the output Y is in general the linear superposition of the desired
signal response y
s
and an undesired noise/interference response y
n
. Our objective will thus be
to choose an optimal set of complex space time weights w, so as to maximize SINR.
Specifically, the weight vector that maximizes SINR is given by

(3.52)
Where
is the NMNM total interference (clutter and/or jamming) plus receiver

noise covariance matrix, k is a scalar that does not affect the SINR, and
is the NM-
dimensional space-time (angle Doppler) steering vector of the desired signal which is given
by

The corresponding optimal SINR is given by

(3.53)
Now the optimum space-time beamformer is utilizing very high-resolution information
regarding the interference, which is manifested as sharp nulls in the angle-Doppler patterns.
Indeed, a very high-resolution (i.e., a so-called super-resolution ) spectral estimator underlies
the beamformer and is given by

(3.54)
This is simply the reciprocal of the optimal SINR given by equation 3.53
The reason (3.54) achieves a much higher resolution than the Fourier based estimator of
(3.43a) is that the weight vector minimizes leakage from all other angle-Doppler, while
maintaining a main beam constraint. To see this explicitly, consider the Capon estimator
(weight vector), which satisfies the following optimization problem:
|

Since R is assumed to be positive-definite, the objective function is a convex quadratic form
subject to a linear equality constraint and s is size-MN MIMO space time steering vector.
w
32

However, the covariance matrix R can be estimated by using the neighboring range bin cells.
In practice, in order to prevent self-nulling, a target-free covariance matrix can be estimated
by using guard cells. Again, the covariance matrix R is ; it is much larger than in
the SIMO case because of the extra dimension. The complexity of the inversion of such a
large matrix is high. The estimation of such a large covariance matrix also converges slowly.
To overcome these problems, partially adaptive techniques can be applied.

CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Chapter 4: Result and Discussion
34

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, we have provided simulation results for both the probability of detection of
Coherent MIMO Radar and reduction of 2-D interrupting signals (noise, clutter and jammer)
from the receiving signal at the receiver end of the Coherent MIMO Radar using STAP. The
required materials and methods for evaluating the probability of detection of Coherent MIMO
Radar were given in the previous chapter. We have assumed the transmitted signals of the
Coherent MIMO Radar are space time processed and probability of detection is evaluated by
changing the number of transmitter and receiver of Coherent MIMO Radar.
At first we have simulated PoD against SNR without STC and then simulated the PoD
against SNR with STC. A comparison is made between two detection schemes. Again for
reducing the interrupting signals with STAP proper null matrixes are developed to suppress
the cell containing interrupting signals.
4.1 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar
All simulations are performed for Coherent MIMO Radar with multiple transmitting and
receiving antennas for a given signal to noise ratio equation (3.13) and probability of false
alarm (p
fa
) equation (3.10a). In the case of Coherent MIMO Radar, probability of target
detection is depending on the output of receiver antennas because both transmitting and
receiving antennas are closely spaced. Due to close spacing, they share the same angle
variable at both ends. If the transmitted antennas transmit without space time processed
signals, the correlation of receiving signals are not much reliable for target detection,
parameter identification and target classification due to diversity of waveform and
perspective. In radar systems, target parameters of interest include target strength, location,
and doppler characteristics. MIMO radar systems employ multiple antennas to transmit
multiple waveforms and combine received echoes from the target. If the number of
transmitting antennas increases, the target detection probability is remains same equation
(3.11) with respect to single transmitting antenna, because the received energy is totally
dependent on the number of receiving antennas. For that the probability of target detection is
climbs up with the increase in the number of receiving antennas. In the case of using Space
Time Processing at the transmitter end in Coherent MIMO Radar the detection probability of
the target increases equation (3.14). In this thesis, the transmitting portion of the Coherent
MIMO Radar is fully assumed for evaluating the detection performances. At the previous
chapter, the compulsory equations for the both with and without Space Time Processed
transmitting end equation (3.12) and the receiving signals equation (3.7 and 3.12) were
shown.

Analysis of the Probability of detection of the target for Coherent MIMO Radar is organized
as follows,
Coherent MIMO Radar without Space time processing for variable M.
Coherent MIMO Radar without Space time processing for variable N.
Coherent MIMO Radar with Space time processing for variable M.
Coherent MIMO Radar with Space time processing for variable N.
35

Comparison of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar between with and
without Space time processing.

4.1.1 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar
without Space time processing for variable M
Here we have considered a coherent MIMO Radar system that has a transmitter and a
receiver array consisting M and N elements respectively and (
) is the
baseband signal transmitted by the th transmit antenna and (
). Assuming
that the transmitted signals are mutually orthogonal and a stationary complex target is located
at (
). Also have assumed that the direction of the target with respect to
transmitter and receiver arrays are and
respectively. The PoD is determined by equation

(3.11) which mentioned in chapter 3. We have simulated this equation for variable number of
transmitters, M (M=1, M=5, M=9) and constant number of receivers, N (N=5).
Three curves of probability of target detection are generated in figure 4.1. The curves in
figure 4.1 show that the detection performance does not change with the increase in M. This
is because the transmitted power is normalized and it does not change with the number of
transmit elements and also because the noise power and the signal power in the received
signal after coherent summation increases at the same rate.

Fig 4.1: Probability of Detection plotted against SNR for Coherent MIMO Radar without
space time processing for variable M and constant N.

4.1.2 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar
without Space time processing for variable N
The main PoD equation (3.11) is simulated for variable number of receivers N (N=1, N=5,
N=9, N=13) and constant number of transmitters M (M=5). Four curves of probability of
target detection are generated in figure 4.2. The curves in Figure 4.2 show that the detection
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar
SNR(dB)
p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

Coherent MIMO,M=1, N=5
36

performance of Coherent MIMO Radar improves with the increase of N. This is because the
transmitted power is normalized but it change with the number of receiver elements, and also
because the noise power and the signal power in the received signal after coherent summation
increases at the same rate.

Fig 4.2: Probability of Detection plotted against SNR for Coherent MIMO Radar without
space time processing at variable N and constant M.

4.1.3 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar with
Space time processing variable M
We have considered a coherent MIMO radar with space time processed waveforms system
that has transmit and a receive array consisting of M and N elements respectively. The
received signal is also scaled so that the total received signal increases directly in
proportional to rectangular pulses. The resultant signal model for the received signal can be
expressed by the equation (3.12) given at chapter 3. To see the performance limit of coherent
MIMO radar, the steering vector equation (3.3) which carries spatial value become
identical and coherent integration of the received samples becomes possible before detection
process and
equation (3.12) is now a complex number. For coherent MIMO radar with
space time processed waveforms, from the definition of SNR for the radar system is
expressed at equation (3.13) are given at previous chapter. The PoD is determined by
equation (3.14) which mentioned in chapter 3. We have simulated this equation for variable
number of transmitters, M (M=1, M=4, M=9) and constant number of receivers, N (N=5).
Three curves of probability of target detection are generated in figure 4.3. The curves in
figure 4.3 show that the detection performance does not change with the increase of M of the
Coherent MIMO Radar with space time processed transmitting elements. With the results
shown in both figure 4.1 and 4.3, the target detection probability is climbs fast in the case of
space time processed Coherent MIMO Radar but with lower SNR value.

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar
SNR(dB)
p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

37

Fig 4.3: Probability of Detection plotted against SNR with space time processed Coherent
MIMO Radar varying number of transmitters, M and constant N.
4.1.4 Analysis of Probability of Detection for Coherent MIMO Radar with
Space time processing variable N
The PoD for Coherent MIMO Radar with STC is determined by equation (3.14) mentioned in
chapter 3. We have simulated this equation for variable number of receivers, N (N=1, N=5,
N=9, N=13) and a constant number of transmitters, M (M=5). The curves in Figure 4.4 show
that the detection performances of Coherent MIMO Radar change with the increase of N.
This is because the transmitted power is normalized but it change with the number of receiver
elements, and also because the noise power and the signal power in the received signal after
coherent summation increases at the same rate. Although the number of transmitted signals
and the total transmitted power is the same in every situation, the detection performance
increases as the number of receive antennas increases since the total received energy is
increased.

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms
SNR(dB)
p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

STC-MIMO,M=1, N=5
STC-MIMO,M=4, N=5
STC-MIMO,M=9, N=5
38

Fig 4.4: Probability of Detection Plotted against SNR for STC Coherent MIMO Radar at
variable N
4.1.5 Comparison of Probability of Detection of Coherent MIMO Radar
between with and without Space time processing
Fixed number of transmitters M (M=5) and receivers N (N=5) are taken in this case. Figure
4.5 shows comparison of PoD of Coherent MIMO Radar between with and without Space
time processing. From the figure 4.5, for SNR 5dB the PoD of Coherent MIMO Radar with
STP is .94 in the scale of 1, where the PoD of Coherent MIMO Radar without STP for same
SNR is .75. It is easy to observe from figure 4.5, PoD curve climbs up if the Coherent MIMO
Radar transmitted signals are space time processed.
With space time processed Coherent MIMO Radar the target detection probability is
improved but the SNR is lower than value of SNR when target detection probability is in the
top is case of without space time processed Coherent MIMO Radar. In this phenomenon, the
target response is interfered by some 2-D unwanted signals which is represent as noise,
clutter and jammer.
-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms
SNR(dB)
p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

STC-MIMO,M=5, N=1
STC-MIMO,M=5, N=5
STC-MIMO,M=5, N=9
STC-MIMO,M=5, N=13
39

Fig 4.5: Comparison of Probability of Detection between with and without Space Time
Processing
4.2 Analysis of Reduction of the 2-D interrupting signals (noise, clutter and
jammer) from the receiving signal at the receiver end of the Coherent
MIMO Radar using STAP (Space Time Adaptive Processing).
In this section, we have evaluated the SINR (signal to interferences and noise ratio)
performance of STAP method and the rationale for joint 2-D space and time (angle-Doppler)
processing is presented. The detailed nature of the angle-Doppler structure of clutter was
thoroughly examined from a variety of perspectives. A detailed analysis of the space-time
clutter covariance matrix was mentioned (3.45) at previous chapter. An expression for the
total space-time clutter-plus jamming-plus noise covariance was also derived for the case of
uncorrelated noise jamming. Utilizing the optimization an expression for the optimal SINR
space-time beamformer was derived and illustrated with multiple jammer-plus-clutter
scenarios. Finally, STAP was introduced via the substitution of the ideal covariance matrix
(unknown a priori) with an estimation obtained from sample data.
In the simulation portion, the estimated parameters are assumed N=10, M=12, No=250.
Where N is the numbers of receiving antenna, M is the numbers of pulse and No is the
numbers of k
th
clutter bins. The clutter to noise ratio (CNR) is 30dB. There are one jammers
and one target present at -37
o
and 24
o
. The jammer to signal ratio (JNR) for each jammer
equals 0dB. The signal to noise ratio for target equals to 10dB. The SINR is normalized so
that the maximum SINR equals 0dB. The jammers are modeled as point sources that emit
independent white Gaussian signals (3.45a and 3.45b). The clutter points are equally spaced
on the range bin and the RCS (radar cross section) for each clutter is modeled as identical
independent Gaussian random variables.

-20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Comparison of probability detection
SNR(dB)
p
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

d
e
t
e
c
t
i
o
n

STC-MIMO,M=5, N=5
MIMO,M=5, N=5
40

4.2.1Total Return Spectrum before STAP Detection
In this portion the result of STAP detection is given for all types of signal like target, clutter,
noise and jammer. Figure 4.6 represents the total return spectrum of the echoes at the receiver
end and figure 4.7 represents the 3D graphical identifications of the figure 4.6. To Use
Steering vector which carry angle and doppler information of the receiving signal,
evaluations are done with the weighted matrices (3.51) and joint covariance matrices (3.45)
(interferences, target). To frame this graphical representation required MATLAB codes are
given in appendix.

sine angle
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

d
o
p
p
l
e
r
Total Return spectrum before STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
40
45
50
55
60
65
sine angle
Total Return spectrum before STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer
normalized doppler
Fig 4.6: Total return spectrum at the receiver end with target, clutter, noise and jammer,
before STAP detection.
Fig 4.7: 3-D plot of total return spectrum at the receiver end with target, clutter, noise and
jammer, before STAP detection.
41

4.2.2 Detection of Target and Jammer by STAP and Removal of Clutter
The goal of space time adaptive processing (STAP) is to find a linear combination of the
extracted signals so that the SINR can be maximized. Thus the target signal can be extracted
from the interferences, clutter, and noise to perform the detection. We next have turned our
attention to derive the optimal space-time beamformer for rejecting both clutter and jamming.

sine angle
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

d
o
p
p
l
e
r
STAP Detection of target & jammer; clutter removed

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
sine angle
STAP Detection of target & jammer; clutter removed
normalized doppler
Fig. 4.8: STAP detection; removal of clutter and noise while target & jammer remains.

Fig. 4.9: 3-D plot of STAP detection; removal of clutter and noise while target & jammer
remains.

42

Figure 4.8 shows how STAP can remove the clutter from the receiving signal. In figure 4.9
represents the 3D of the figure 4.8 where detection of target and jammer by STAP and
removal of clutter is shown.
To frame this graphical representation required MATLAB codes are given in appendix.

4.2.3 Detection of Target by STAP, Removal of Clutter and Jammer
Figure 4.10 shows how STAP can remove the clutter and jammer from the receiving signal.
In figure 4.9 represents the 3D of the figure 4.8 where detection of target by STAP and
removal of clutter and jammer is shown.
To frame this graphical representation required MATLAB codes are given in appendix.

sine angle
n
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

d
o
p
p
l
e
r
STAP Detection of target; jammer & clutter removed

-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
Fig. 4.10: Output of STAP processor. Target remain; jammer and clutter ridge
returns have been removed
43

Fig 4.11: 3-D plot of Output of STAP processor. Target remain; jammer and clutter
ridge returns have been removed

-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
sine angle
SNR after STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer
normalized doppler

CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS
Chapter 5: Conclusion
45

CONCLUSIONS

STAP (Space Time Adaptive Processing) is an adaptive signal processing framework for
reducing the unwanted signals like noise, clutter and jammer from the receiving signal at the
receiver end of the Coherent MIMO Radar. This framework has the potential of dramatically
improving the receiving signals where interferences are reduced and the receiving signals are
having only target response.
In the analysis of Probability of detection, Coherent MIMO radar have closely spaced
antennas at both at the transmitter and receiver end and it is assumed that every transmit
receive pair sees the same RCS. The improvements are achieved in coherent MIMO radar as
result of waveform diversity. One of these improvements is higher angular resolution and
better rejection of the jamming sources because of virtual extended array apertures. Better
detection and parameter estimation performance can also be achieved by using data
dependent adaptive array techniques.
In this thesis, mainly discussed about the adaptive techniques for reduction of the interrupting
signals as well as analyzed the probability of target detection performances of Coherent
MIMO radar. Adaptivity techniques were used by the STAP for suppressing the undesirable
part at receiver end those degrades the performance of the target detection of Coherent
MIMO radar. Waveform design problem with information about the target and the clutter
responses were being dealt. Several numerical examples were provided which showed that
the coherent MIMO radar with space time processing waveforms has much better
performance than others. Finally simulate a realistic scenario to analyze the performance of
the corresponding system. Using higher order modulations in MIMO systems with STC, we
can achieve better detection rates, target localization and bandwidth efficiency.
Plans for Future Work
There are many issues on STAP of Coherent MIMO Radar that we would like to deal in
future.
In this thesis we analyzed the receiving portion of Coherent MIMO Radar; we would
like research on the transmitting end.
In the field of STAP, developing an optimal algorithm is very essential, we would like
to work on it.

46

REFERENCES

[1]. M. Skolnik, Introduction to Radar Systems, 3rd ed., New York: McGraw-Hill,
2001.
[2]. Safak Bilgi Akdemir, An Overview of Detection in MIMO Radar, Turkey, Middle
East Technical University Press, Sept. 2010.
[3]. J. Li and P. Stoica, MIMO radar with colocated antennas, IEEE Signal Processing
Magaz., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 106114, Sept. 2007.
[4]. Mohinder Jankiraman, Space-Time Codes and MIMO Systems, London, Artech
House, 2004.
[5]. J. R. Guerci, Space-Time Adaptive Processing for Radar, 1
st
edition, London,
Artech House, 2003.
[6]. Janice Onanian McMahon, Space-Time Adaptive Processing on the Mesh
Synchronous Processor, America, The Lincoln Laboratory Journal Volume 9,
Number 2, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1996.
[7]. Chaoran Du, Performance Evaluation and Waveform Design for MIMO Radar,
Scotland, The University of Edinburgh Press, March, 2010.
[8]. Mark A. Richards, Fundamentals of Radar Signal Processing, Georgia Institute of
Technology, McGraw-Hill, 2005.
[9]. P. Tait, Introduction to Radar Target Recognition, 2
nd
ed., Radar, Sonar and
Navigation Series 18, London, The Institution of Engineering and Technology Press,
2009.
[10]. Z. C. Yang, X. Li and H. Q. Wang, Space-Time Adaptive Processing Based on
Weighted Regularized Sparse Recovery, Progress in Electromagnetics Research B,
Vol. 42, pages (245-262), China, National University of Defense Technology Press,
2012.
[11]. J. Li and P. Stoica, MIMO radar signal processing, New Jersey, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., Hoboken publication, 2009.
[12]. Bassem R. Mahafza Ph.D., Radar Systems Analysis and Design Using MATLAB,
New York, Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2000.
[13]. Mahafza, B. R., Radar Signal Analysis and Signal Processing Using MATLAB,
New York, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2008.
[14]. Bassem R. Mahafza, Ph.D., Atef Z. Elsherbeni, MATLAB Simulations for Radar
Systems Design, New York, Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2004.
[15]. Brian R. Hunt, Ronald L. Lipsman, Jonathan M. Rosenberg A Guide to MATLAB for
Beginners and Experienced Users, Second Edition, New York, Cambridge
University Press, 2006.
Appendix
47

APPENDICES

MATLAB Code forplotting probability of detection of coherent MIMO radar with and
without STC with respect to SNR
%% Probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar %%
clc
clear all
p=10^-2;%pfa=probability of false alarm
r=log(p);
for M=1:4:12
snr=-20:1:25;%SNR
snr1=10.^(snr./10);
N=5;
t=((snr1*N)+1);
Pd=(r./t);%pd=probability of detection
a=exp(Pd);
if M==1
plot(snr,a,'g*-','linewidth',2)
hold on
elseif M==5
plot(snr,a,'k*-','linewidth',2)
hold on
elseif M==9
plot(snr,a,'b*-','linewidth',2)
hold on
else
plot(snr,a,'m*-','linewidth',2)
hold on
end
grid on
axis([-20 25 0 1])
title('probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar ')
xlabel('SNR(dB)')
ylabel('probability of detection')
loc=legend('Coherent MIMO,M=1, N=5','Coherent MIMO,M=5, N=5','Coherent MIMO,M=9, N=5')
set(loc,'Location','NorthWest')
set(loc,'Interpreter','none')
end

%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
clc
clear all
r=log(p);
%for M=1:4:12
snr=-20:1:20;%SNR
snr1=10.^(snr./10);
for N=1:4:13
t=((snr1*N)+1);
a=exp(Pd);
%ylim([0 1])
%xlim([-20 30])
if N==1
hold on
elseif N==5
Appendix
48

hold on
elseif N==9
hold on
else
hold on
grid on
axis([-20 20 0 1])
end
end
title('probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar ')
xlabel('SNR(dB)')
loc=legend('Coherent MIMO,M=5, N=1','Coherent MIMO,M=5, N=5','Coherent MIMO,M=5, N=9','Coherent
MIMO,M=5, N=13')
set(loc,'Location','northwest')
%end
%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%%Probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms
clc
clear all
r=log(p);
snr=-20:1:20;%SNR
snr1=10.^(snr./10);
for M=1:4:12
N=5;
t=((snr1*N*4)+1);
a=exp(Pd);
%ylim([0 1])
%xlim([-20 30])
%plot(snr,a,'m*-','linewidth',2)
if M==1
hold on
elseif M==5
hold on
elseif M==9
hold on
grid on
else
hold on
grid on
axis([-20 20 0 1])
end
end
title('probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms')
xlabel('SNR(dB)')
loc=legend('STC-MIMO,M=1, N=5','STC-MIMO,M=4, N=5','STC-MIMO,M=9, N=5')
Appendix
49

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
clc
clear all
r=log(p);
snr=-20:1:20;%SNR
snr1=10.^(snr./10);
M=5;
for N=1:4:13;
t=((snr1*N*4)+1);
a=exp(Pd);
%ylim([0 1])
%xlim([-20 30])
%plot(snr,a,'*-','linewidth',2)

if N==1
plot(snr,a,'go-','linewidth',2)
hold on
elseif N==5
plot(snr,a,'ko-','linewidth',2)
hold on
elseif N==9
plot(snr,a,'bo-','linewidth',2)
hold on
else
plot(snr,a,'mo-','linewidth',2)
hold on
grid on
axis([-20 20 0 1])
end
hold on
grid on
axis([-20 20 0 1])
title('probability of detection for coherent MIMO radar with STC waveforms')
xlabel('SNR(dB)')
end
loc=legend('STC-MIMO,M=5, N=1','STC-MIMO,M=5, N=5','STC-MIMO,M=5, N=9','STC-MIMO,M=5,
N=13')
set(loc,'Location','southeast')

%%----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
clc
clear all
r=log(p);
snr=-20:1:20;%SNR
snr1=10.^(snr./10);
N=5;
t=((snr1*N*4)+1);
a=exp(Pd);
%ylim([0 1])
%xlim([-20 30])
plot(snr,a,'v-','linewidth',2)
hold on
Appendix
50

grid on
M=5;
t=((snr1*M)+1);
a1=exp(Pd);
%ylim([0 1])
%xlim([-20 30])
plot(snr,a1,'gs-','linewidth',2)
grid on
axis([-20 20 0 1])
title('compromise of probability detection')
xlabel('SNR(dB)')
loc=legend('STC-MIMO,M=5, N=5','MIMO,M=5, N=5')

MATLAB Code for removing the interference from the total return signal using STAP
%% stap_run%%
clc
clear all
close all
sintheta_t1 = .4;
wd_t1 =-.6;
sintheta_t2 = -.6;
wd_t2 = .2;
[LL, sintheta, wd] = stapstd(sintheta_t1, wd_t1, sintheta_t2, wd_t2);
LL = LL / max(max(abs(LL)));
LL = max(LL, 1e-6);
figure (3)
imagesc(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(LL)))
colorbar
title('STAP Detection of target & jammer; clutter removed');
set(gca,'ydir','normal'), xlabel('sine angle'), ylabel('normalized doppler')
figure (4)
surf(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(LL)))
shading interp
title('STAP Detection of target & jammer; clutter removed');
%stop
[LL, sintheta, wd] = stap_smaa(sintheta_t1, wd_t1, sintheta_t2, wd_t2);
LL = LL / max(max(abs(LL)));
LL = max(LL, 1e-6);
figure(5)
imagesc(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(LL)))
colorbar
title('STAP Detection of target; jammer & clutter removed');
figure(6)
surf(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(LL)))
shading interp
title('SNR after STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer');

%-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%stapstd%

function [LL, sintheta, wd] = stapstd(sintheta_t1, wd_t1, sintheta_t2, wd_t2);
Appendix
51

N = 10; % Number of receiving anttena
M = 12; % Pulses
No = 2500; % k-th clutter bins
beta = 1; % The way the clutter fills the angle Doppler or proporsional constant depend on ownership speed
dol = 0.5; % d over lambda
CNR = 30; % dB Clutter to Noise Ratio
SNR = 10; % dB Signal to Noise Ratio
JSR = 0; % dB Jammer to Signal Ratio
% Set the noise power
sigma2_n = 1;
% Clutter power
sigma2_c = sigma2_n * 10^(CNR/10);
sigma_c = sqrt(sigma2_c);
% Target 1 power
sigma2_t1 = sigma2_n * 10^(SNR/10);
sigma_t1 = sqrt(sigma2_t1)
% Target 2 (Jammer) power
sigma2_t2 = sigma2_t1 * 10^(JSR/10);
sigma_t2 = sqrt(sigma2_t2);
% Ground clutter is the primary source of interference
sintheta = linspace(-1, 1, No);
phi = 2 * dol * sintheta;
wd = beta * phi;
Rc = zeros(N*M);
ac_all = zeros(N*M,1);
for k = 1: length(phi),
ac = sigma_c * stap_steering_vector(phi(k), N, beta*phi(k), M); % 70 page Xc
Rc = Rc + ac * ac'; % covarience matrix of target "1" , "'" --> conjugate transpose 78 page
ac_all = ac_all + ac; % "w" not optimized yet
end
c=length(phi);
Rc = Rc / length(phi);
% Noise signals decorrelate from pulse-to-pulse
% noise covariance matrix is
Rn = sigma2_n * eye(M*N);
% Target 1 covariance matrix
% at1 = st_steering_vector(sintheta_t1, N, wd_t1, M);
% Rt1 = sigma2_t1 * at1 * at1';
at1 = sigma_t1 * stap_steering_vector(sintheta_t1, N, wd_t1, M); % Xj1
Rt1 = at1 * at1'; % covarience matrix of target "1"
% Target 2 covariance matrix (may represnt a jammer)
% at2 = st_steering_vector(sintheta_t2, N, wd_t2, M);
% Rt2 = sigma2_t2 * at2 * at2';
at2 = sigma_t2 * stap_steering_vector(sintheta_t2, N, wd_t2, M);
Rt2 = at2 * at2'; % covarience matrix of target "2"
% Total covariance matrix
R = Rc + Rn + Rt1 + Rt2;
% Unweighted spectrum of the total return from the beamformer
sintheta = linspace(-1, 1);
wd = beta * sintheta;
Pb = zeros(length(wd), length(sintheta));
for nn = 1: length(sintheta),
for mm = 1: length(wd),
a = stap_steering_vector(sintheta(nn), N, wd(mm), M);
Pb(mm, nn) = a' * R * a; %signal to interference noise ratio page 80
end
end
do_plot = 1;
if do_plot,
% Display the total return spectrum
Appendix
52

figure (1)
imagesc(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(Pb)))
colorbar
title('Total Return spectrum before STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer');
figure (2)
surf(sintheta, wd, 10*log10(abs(Pb)))
shading interp, , xlabel('sine angle'), ylabel('normalized doppler')
title('Total Return spectrum before STAP Detection of target, clutter, noise & jammer');
end
R = Rc + Rn + Rt1 + Rt2;
% Calculate optimal weights
Rc = (ac_all * ac_all') / length(phi);
% Rinv = inv(Rc + Rn); % Original
%wopt = Rinv * (at1 + at2);% Original
Rinv = inv(Rc + Rn ); % our expectation
wopt = Rinv' * (at1 + at2 ); % our expectation
LL = zeros(length(wd), length(sintheta));
a = stap_steering_vector(sintheta(nn), N, wd(mm), M);
% LL(mm,nn) = abs( a' * Rinv * (at1+at2+ac_all) )^2 / ( a' * Rinv * a ); % Original
LL(mm,nn) = abs(a' * Rinv * (at1+at2+ac_all) )^2 / ( a' * (Rc + Rn ) * a ); % our expectation stap_ll.doc
page 5=SINR
end
end
disp(size(a))
disp (size(Rinv))

%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%stap_maa%
function [LL, sintheta, wd] = stap_smaa(sintheta_t1, wd_t1, sintheta_t2, wd_t2);
do_plot = 1;
N = 10; Na = 2*N-1;
M = 12;
No = 250;
beta = 1;
dol = 0.5;
CNR = 20; % dB
SNR = 10; % dB
JSR = 0; % dB
% Set the noise power
sigma2_n = 1;
% Clutter power
sigma2_c = sigma2_n * 10^(CNR/10);
sigma_c = sqrt(sigma2_c);
% Target 1 power
sigma2_t1 = sigma2_n * 10^(SNR/10);
% Target 2 (Jammer) power
sigma2_t2 = sigma2_t1 * 10^(JSR/10);
% Ground clutter is the primary source of interference
sintheta = linspace(-1, 1, No);
phi = 2 * dol * sintheta;
wd = beta * phi;
Appendix
53

Rc = zeros(Na*M);
ac_all = zeros(Na*M,1);
for k = 1: length(phi),
ac = sigma_c * smaa_st_steering_vector(phi(k), N, beta*phi(k), M);
Rc = Rc + ac * ac';
ac_all = ac_all + ac;
end
Rc = Rc / length(phi);
% Noise signals decorrelate from pulse-to-pulse
% With this assumption, noise covariance matrix is
Rn = sigma2_n * eye(M*Na);
% at1 = smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta_t1, N, wd_t1, M);
% Rt1 = sigma2_t1 * at1 * at1';
at1 = sigma_t1 * smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta_t1, N, wd_t1, M);
Rt1 = at1 * at1';
% at2 = smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta_t2, N, wd_t2, M);
% Rt2 = sigma2_t2 * at2 * at2';
at2 = sigma_t2 * smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta_t2, N, wd_t2, M);
Rt2 = at2 * at2';
R = Rc + Rn + Rt1 + Rt2;
% Unweighted spectrum of the total return from the beamformer
% Calculate optimal weights
Rc = (ac_all * ac_all') / length(phi);
Rinv = inv(Rc + Rn);
wopt = Rinv * (at1 + at2);

LL = zeros(length(wd), length(sintheta));
a = smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta(nn), N, wd(mm), M);
LL(mm,nn) = abs( a' * Rinv * (at1+at2+ac_all) )^2 / ( a' * Rinv * a );
end
end

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%stap_steering_vector%
function a = stap_steering_vector(sintheta, N, wd, M)
%page STAp.PDF 70 page
a_N = exp(-j*pi*sintheta*[0:N-1]');%s(0)
b_M = exp(-j*pi*wd *[0:M-1]');

a = kron(b_M, a_N);%Kronecker product and st = ss(?) ? st(fd)
%-------------------------------------------------------------------------
%smaa_st_steering_vector%

function a = smaa_st_steering_vector(sintheta, N, wd, M)
a_N = exp(-j*pi*sintheta*[-(N-1):+(N-1)]');
b_M = exp(-j*pi*wd *[0:M-1]');
a_N = a_N .* ts_weighting(N);
a = kron(b_M, a_N);
%-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%ts_weighting%

Appendix
54

function c = ts_weighting(N)
%c = ts_weighting(N)
%
% returns the triangular weighting
% N - number of transmitting antenna elements

c = zeros(2*N-1,1);
c(1:N-1) = [1:N-1];
c(N) = N;
c(N+1:2*N-1) = 2*N-[N+1:2*N-1];

Appendix

Final Thesis

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Final Thesis

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

[B. Sc. Eng.

be the baseband signal transmitted by the th transmit antenna and

. Also have assumed that the

can be written as:

is the carrier frequency of the radar and

represents the time delay

represents the time delay common to all transmit elements and

transmit steering vector and transmitted signal vector as

can be written in the vector form as

is a complex constant that is proportional to the RCS seen by th receive antenna.

received signal vector , receive steering vector

channel matrix is defined as

complex vector whose entries correspond to the output of the each

complex noise vector, and is a

are on the unit circle.

denote the discrete time baseband signal transmitted by the transmit

is the total average

indicates absence of signal and

indicates presence of signal.

can be calculated as,

denote the discrete time baseband signal transmitted by the transmit

is the total average

is the noise vector.

indicates absence of signal and

indicates presence of signal.

is now time varying. The

are, respectively, the Hilbert transforms of x

denotes the (i, j)th element ofA.

subject to the constraint that the norm

are column vectors then

is termed the interference (receiver noise only in this case) covariance

, due to both clutter and receiver

is the NM-dimensional target steering vector specifying the normalized

is the received NM-dimensional total clutter-plus-noise vector RV.

has the following block-diagonal form:

) we get the solution

would not exist and we would need to use

is the NMNM total interference (clutter and/or jamming) plus receiver

respectively. The PoD is determined by equation

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi