AARMS TECHNOLOGY

Vol. 3, No. 3 (2004) 415–425

A comparison between different types of weighting

function used for radar antennas
GHEORGHE IUBU, IOAN NICOLAESCU, DORU IOSIF, ADRIAN STOICA

Military Technical Academy, Bucharest, Romania

Located at the interface between the free space and the radar system the antenna is an
important part of any radar system. The latest technological achievements allow using
more and more antenna arrays for different types of equipment. The individual elements
that make up an array can be fed in different ways and, obviously, the parameters of the
array depend on the way the elementary antennas are fed. The radar antennas have to
meet two conflicting requirements. One the one hand, the beam width has to be as
narrow as possible to achieve a good accuracy, and, on the other hand, the side lobes
level has to be as low as possible to decrease the jamming probability. In order to study
the influence of the amplitude distribution to the parameters of the antenna, an array
made up of 17 elements is considered. The antenna elements are uniformly located at a
half wavelength separation. The analysis has been made for a frequency of 10 GHz and
for several weighting function: Hamming, Hann, Blackmann and Taylor.

Introduction

The antenna is the element, which is located at the interface between free space and the
radar equipment. The performance of the radar systems relies on antenna performance.
During the time antenna systems have became more and more intricate. Due to the
technological evolution a lot of equipment are using arrays. These can be fed in
different ways and obviously their pattern properties depend on the way they are fed.
Other elements, which determine radiation pattern of an array, are the type of individual
antenna from which the array consists of, the number of antennas elements and the
shape of the array. The radar antenna systems have to meet two contradictory
conditions. One the one hand the beam width has to be as small as possible to achieve a
good accuracy in target co-ordinates measurements and, on the other hand the sidelobes
level has to be as low as possible to decrease jamming probability. In order to analyse
the influence of the amlitude distribution to the parameters of the antenna an array made
of 17 elements is considered. The antenna elements are uniformly located at a half
wavelength distance. The analysis has been made for a frequency of 10 GHz, that is
Received: April 20, 2004

Address for correspondence:

GHEORGHE IUBU
Military Technical Academy
81-83 George Cosbuc Avenue
Bucharest, Romania
E-mail: iubuh@mta.ro
G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

3 cm wavelength, and for three weighting function: cosines with pedestal, Blackmann
and Taylor. The following notations have been made:
– discrete phase of weighting function k = 0, 1 ... N–1
N −1
k−
β(k) := π ⋅ 2
N −1
– phase shift of two signals received by two adjacent elements of antenna (α is the
angle between the direction to source and perpendicular line to antenna
aperture):
d π
ψ (α) := 2 ⋅ π ⋅ ⋅ sin ⋅α
λ 180
– complex function which characterizes the spatial signal received by an antenna
element (k = 0, 1 ... N–1)
F(α,k):=e–j.k.∆ψ(α)
p:= 0 ... N–1
I:= 0 ... N–1
– unit matrix NXN
Ip,I:= 0
Ip,p:= 1
– vector function of spatial signal (a characterizes the amplitude of the signal):
S(a,α) = (a(F(α,0),F(α,1),F(α,2),F(α,3),F(α,4),F(α,5),F(α,6),
F(α,7),F(α,8),F(α,9),F(α,10),F(α,11),F(α,12),
F(α,13),F(α,14),F(α,15),F(α,16))T

Cosines with pedestal weighting function

The expression of generalized weighting function is given by:

M −1
Pp (k) := C M −|I| ⋅ e j⋅2⋅I⋅β(k)
I= − (M −1)

where M = 2 is the number of terms, and p is a coefficient which value can be:
– 1 for uniform weighting;
– 0.08 for Hamming weighting;
– 0.5 for Hann weighting.

416 AARMS 3(3) (2004)

 G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

m:= –(M–1) ... M–1

The coefficients of this function, for p = 0.08, are:
0.23
Cm+M:= Cm+M = 0.54
0.23
1 p
4
1 p
2
1 p
4
– weighting matrix is:
Ppn,n:= Pp(n)
– vector function of spatial weighted signal is:
S ( ):= Pp.S(1, )
p
– the expression of directivity coefficient of the array is:
2
N 1
(Pp k,k )
k 0
Dp : ,
N 1
2
(Pp k,k )
k 0
Dp(dB):= 20.log(Dp), Dp = 11.947, Dp(dB) = 21.545.dB

and worsening coefficient of the antenna gain is:

N 1
1
p : ◊ Pp k,k ,
N
k 0
p(dB):= 20.log( p), p = 0.513, p(dB) = –5.799.dB

AARMS 3(3) (2004) 417

G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

In Figures 1 and 2 the pattern of the array for p = 0.08 given by:

Fp (α, α s ) :=
((S p (α) )) ⋅ S(1, α s )
T

N ⋅ ρp
are represented.

Figure 1. The pattern of 17 elements array with Hamming weighting

Figure 2. The sidelobes of the pattern of 17 elements array with Hamming weighting

418 AARMS 3(3) (2004)

 G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

“Blackmann” weighting function

In this case the similar variables like for cosines weighting function are:
M:= 3
m:= –(M–1) ... M–1
M 1
PB (k) : C M |I| ◊e i◊2◊I◊ (k)
I (M 1)
PBn,n:= PB(n)
SB( ):= PB.S(1, )
Cm+M:=
1
32
1
4
7
16
1
4
1
32
2
N 1
(PB k ,k )
k 0
DB :
N 1
(PB k ,k ) 2
k 0
DB(dB):= 20.log(DB) DB = 9.62 DB(dB) = 19.663.dB
N 1
1
B: ◊ PB k,k B(dB):= 20.log( B)
N
k 0

B = 0.412 B(dB) = –7.707.dB

AARMS 3(3) (2004) 419

G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

The patterns of the array given by:

FB (α, α s ) :=
((S B (α)))T ⋅ S(1, α s )
N ⋅ ρB

are represented in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3. The patterns of 17 elements array with Blackmann weighting

Figure 4. The sidelobes of the pattern of 17 elements array with Blackmann weighting

420 AARMS 3(3) (2004)

 G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

“Taylor” weighting function

The number of Taylor’s series given by:

u:= 8 m:= 0 ... u–1

and sidelobes level:
|α1dB |
1
α1dB:= –80 A:= ⋅ acish 10 20 A=3.152
π

Taylor’s function parameters are:

σ=0983
u
σ :=
2
1
A2 + u −
2

Taylor’s coefficients are:

u −1
((u − 1)!) 2 m2
Fm :=
(u + m − 1)!⋅(u − m − 1)!
⋅ ∏ 1− 1
2
F0:= 1 M:= u
p =1
A + p−
2
2

and the others parameters needed for Taylor weighting function:

CM–|m|:= F|m|

AARMS 3(3) (2004) 421

G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

CM–|m|=
6.855.10–5
–9.576.10–5
9.463.10–5
1.199.10–5
1.058.10–3
0.106
0.6
1
0.6
0.106
1.058.10–3
1.199.10–5
9.463.10–5
–9.576.10–5
6.855.10–5
M 1
PT (k) : C M |I| ◊e i◊2◊I◊ (k) PTn,n:= PT(n)
I (M 1)
2
N 1
(PTk,k )
k 0
ST( ):= PT.S(1. ) DT : DT(dB):= 20.log(DT)
N 1
(PTk,k ) 2
k 0

DT = 9.191 DT(dB) = 19.267.dB

N 1
1
T : ◊ PT (k)
N
k 0
. T(dB)= –0.522.dB
T = 0.942 T(dB):= 20 log( T)

T
S T ( ) ◊S(1, s )
FT ( , s ) :
N◊ T

422 AARMS 3(3) (2004)

 G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

The patterns are showed in Figures 5 and 6.

Figure 5. The patterns of 17 elements array with Taylor weighting

Figure 6. The sidelobes of the pattern of 17 elements array with Taylor weighting

AARMS 3(3) (2004) 423

G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

Comparison between different types of weighting function

In order to show the influences of different weighting function to parameters of the

pattern, especially to beam width and sidelobes level, the patterns analyzed above have
been represented on the same picture. On this picture is drawn also the pattern
corresponding to unweighted array given by:

F(α, α s ) :=
((S(1, α)))T ⋅ S(1, α s )
N

Figure 7. The influence of weighting function to beam width (F(α,αs)-unweighted array, FP(α,αs)-Hamming
weighting, FB(α,αs)-Blackmann weighting, FT(α,αs)-Taylor weighting)

Figure 8. The influence of weighting function to sidelobes level (F(α,αs)-unweighted array, FP(α,αs)-
Hamming weighting, FB(α,αs)-Blackmann weighting, FT(α,αs)-Taylor weighting)

424 AARMS 3(3) (2004)

 G. IUBU et al.: Weighting function in radar systems

Conclusions

1. The parameters of antenna array patterns are determined by the phase and amplitude
distribution of the electromagnetic field on antenna aperture. In order to improve the
characteristic of radiation pattern some weighting functions have been used. These
change the distribution of amplitude and phase of signal received such as the beam
width and the sidelobes level to be minimized. Usually decreasing of beam width is
accompanied by increasing of sidelobes level.
2. The beam directivity is highest for an unweighted array (6°-beam width),
followed by the array with Hamming weighting (9°-beam width), then Blackmann
(11.6°-beam width), and Taylor weighting (12°-beam width).
3. The highest level of sidelobes corresponds to unweighted array (0.23), followed by the
array with Hamming weighting (0.01), Blackmann (0.003) and Taylor weighting (0.00055).
4. Low beam width and low level of sidelobes are two contradictory requests for any
antenna array. If one decreases the other decreases so a balance between the two has to
be made for each specific application.

References

1. GASPARE, G., Advanced Radar Techniques and Systems, Peter Peregrinus, UK, 1993.
2. KRAUS, D. J., Antennas, McGraw-Hill, USA, 1988.
3. SKOLNIK, M. I., Radar Handbook, McGraw-Hill, USA, 1970.

AARMS 3(3) (2004) 425