iiifiiiiiliiiiiiliiill '**'®^

1 1 111 111 III 111 II ill 111 ill i'lll il ill i"' 'I PUBUCATIONS

AlllDb fibBlba

Nisr

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Technology Administration, U.S. Departnnent of Commerce

NIST Technical Note 1534

NIST Technical Note 1534

Uncertainty Analysis of Radar Cross Section

Calibrations at Etcheron Valley Range

Lorant A. Muth

Dale M. Diamond

John A. Leiis

Electromagnetics Division

Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Boulder, CO 80305

September 2004

U.S. Department of Commerce

Donald L Evans, Secretary

Technology Administration

Phillip J. Bond, Under Secretary for Technology

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Arden L Bement, Jr., Director
Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept

adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the

best available for the purpose.

National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1534

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Tech. Note 1534, XX pages (September 2004)

CODEN: NTNOEF
UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS

OF RADAR CROSS SECTION CALIBRATIONS

AT ETCHERON VALLEY RANGE*t

Lorant A. Muth^

Dale M. Diamond^, and John A. Lelis^

Abstract

The Etcheron Valley Range, Naval Air Warfare Center, Weapons Division at China Lake, CA conducts monostatic and bistatic measure- ments of radar cross section on various targets of interests to DoD. This

document, which follows general guidelines proposed by the National

Institute of Standards and Technology, discusses the assessment of uncertainty in calibrations of radar cross section at the Etcheron Valley

Range, NAWC-WD, a division of NAVAIR located at China Lake, CA.

Key words: calibration uncertainties; radar cross section measurements;

RCS; uncertainty analysis

1 INTRODUCTION

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has established a framework

for estimating uncertainties in radar cross section (RCS) measurements [1]. In this study we

follow the basic outline and format presented in [1] to determine the calibration uncertainty

at the RCS facilities of the Etcheron Valley Range, NAVAIR, Naval Air Warfare Center,

Weapons Division (NAWC-WD), China Lake, CA.

The Etcheron Valley Range (EVR) measures radar cross section of various targets provided

by United States military and civilian customers. The EVR currently operates coherent

RCS measurement systems capable of measuring in the VHP, UHF, L, S, C, X, Ku and Ka

bands (see Appendix A, Table A.l). The North 40 look-down slant range and the South

40 outdoor bounce range (see Figures LI - 1.4) are two fully operational sytems. Typical

targets measured on these ranges are unmanned aerial vehicles, airplane components, aircraft models and components, ship models and components, missiles and tactical ballistic

missiles, very low-observable (vlo) articles, reentry vehicles, ground vehicles, rockets and

rocket plumes. The North 40 range can also be used to simulate the ocean environment

for measuring the RCS of ship models and components.

The South 40 range can be configured to measure the low-frequency bistatic RCS of targets

* Distribution authorized to DoD components and U.S. Dept. of Commerce only; Administrative or Operational Use; June 2004.

^A U.S. Government publication, not subject to copyright in the United States.

^NIST, Electromagnetics Division, Boulder, CO

^Consultant, Etcheron Valley Range, China Lake, CA

^Etcheron Valley Range, China Lake, CA
i^l^ . ;i"*t>i.r%^^-/»_*-;>'-'.-**^:.'«.:#-^

Figure 1.1. The South 40 outdoor bounce-range antenna farm capable of making coherent monostatic

RCS measurements in the VHF, UHF, L, S, C, X, Ku, and Ka bands. Additionally, it can be configured

to make coherent bistatic RCS measurements at the VHF, UHF, and L-band frequencies.
Figure 1 .2. Rear view of the South 40 antenna farm and the measurement range. Monostatic

measurements on full-scale targets can be made at various ranges, for example, at 213 m (700 ft), 610 m (2000 ft), 1220 m (4000 ft) and 1524 m (4000 ft). A target at 274 m (900 ft) is used for

bistatic RCS measurements at VHF, UHF, and L-band frequencies.
Figure 1.3. The Parrot peak look-down range measurement facility used to measure targets deployed on the North 40 tilt deck or wet site in Figure 1.4. The look-down angle is 10 degrees and the slant

range is 5182 m (17,000 ft). Measurements have been made in the S, X, Ku, Ka, and W bands.
0)

u

C -3 -^

o 1) •S m Vi

<4_ O o O

on 3

o ^

b O (u

a o

J3 T3

C

o

'*-

-a .22

00 c

c «

o c

c

c« "-^ a —

1) rt ji o o

H o

on r

bO _

T3 O

t

s:. 0)

-% «

N M) ^ o

3 -^

(U *-

.ti o

^5coru- —

o £

~ c

I- v;

C3

(5 on

<u —

o ^

on ^

C ^ C

c5 ^ IJE

c

c _ o S '^ — c 00 4^ o c x: o o "

OO'^ ^

-^ — (/;

'^ £ -o o . b

^ 00 c o *- ^ C " ^ r3 "a =

:3 f^, U
at VHF, UHF and L-band frequencies. This work evolved from earlier coherent bistatic

measurement systems that operated from 30 to 150 MHz and at X band. The capability to

perform bistatic measurements using the system developed at EVR has been demonstrated

recently by successfully completing measurements at various bistatic angles, for example,

35°, 70°, 120° and 145°. The uncertainties of the bistatic measurements will be the subject

of a future study.

In this study, we intend to provide procedures for estimating all sources of uncertainties

of the South 40 RCS measurement system. We consider the uncertainties in the monostatic calibration of the system using standard RCS calibration artifacts as well as the

uncertainties in the monostatic measurement of the RCS of test targets. Calibration and

measurement uncertainty depends on the operational parameters of a RCS range and is specific to the parameters in effect at the time of measurement (see Appendix A, Tables

A. 2 and A. 3). Typical operating conditions and parameters for RCS measurements are assumed for the analysis presented in this report. In our measurement-based approach, a

worst-case scenario, wherein we tend to overestimate the uncertainty, is assumed. Where

appropriate, we explicitly state any assumptions made to support our uncertainty analysis.

2 REPORTING MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY

Here we follow closely the discussion of uncertainty given in [1]. A measurement of a

(RCS) should be quantified by a statement of uncertainty

cr = (Jo ± Act, (1)

where ctq indicates the best RCS estimate, and Act > is a reasonable bound for the

measurement error. Error bounds need not be symmetric:

(Jo + Ao-+ > cr > (To - Acr_

.

(2)

For simplicity, we will continue to use eq (1) with Act — max(A(j_|_, A(j_).

Uncertainties are also stated logarithmically

A(T± (dB) = ±101og(l± —j . (3)

As before, we will often use symmetric bounds. In this case, since A(t_ (dB) > A(t+ (dB),

A(T(dB) = A(j_ (dB)--lOlogM ^j (4a)

A(j(dB) = A(j_ (dB) = -201og( 1-^ 1

, (46)

or equivalently,

An-MR^ = An- CHR^ = -90100- II -

So

where S is the measured electric field signal under consideration. Asymmetric bounds may

be given when reporting larger logarithmic uncertainties. For example, if Aa/ao = 1, then

Aa+ (dB) ^ 3, while A(j_ (dB) = -oo.
The individual sources of uncertainty (called components of uncertainty) should be se- lected so that they are at least approximately independent. Sample NAVAIR-NAWC-WD

uncertainty tables are shown in Table 2.1, where the uncertainty estimates are reported

logarithmically. The top table shows uncertainties related to measurement of a test target; the bottom table shows uncertainties associated with the primary calibration target.

These component uncertainties are identified in the tables with numbers that reference the

sections of this report^ where the corresponding uncertainty is discussed. The last entry

of each table shows the overall uncertainty, which is the root sum of squares (RSS) of the

component uncertainties.

In general, an entry of "neg." in the tables would indicate that, in our opinion, the effect

is unimportant (which could be defined operationally as a magnitude less than about 0.1

dB). An entry of "n.a." (not applicable) would indicate that this source is not considered a factor in the current evaluation (integration error due to target motion, for example, is not applicable when the target is stationary).

The entries are an attempt to represent typical NAVAIR-NAWC-WD uncertainties for the

RCS system configuration and parameters given in Appendix A. The reader should understand, however, that actual uncertainties depend strongly on the particular measurement

configuration. Again, an uncertainty analysis should be performed for each measurement

situation. For example, we need separate tables as a function of signal level for each

frequency band.

The method of uncertainty combination is RSS. That is, the overall uncertainty Act is calculated as

where Actj are the (independent) components of uncertainty. Note that relative (not

logarithmic) uncertainty is used in the calculation of eq (5). That is, from eq (4a),

or from eq (4b),

In general, the combination of individual uncertainties using RSS, as in eq (5), can be

thought of as the resultant of independent uncertainty vectors in a multidimensional space.

This also agrees with the well known formula that the uncertainties in products and quotients of measured quantities propagate, in general, as the RSS of fractional errors as shown

in eq (5) [2]. The usual method of derivation is to assume that the individual uncertainties

AcTj cire small. However, we can show that this method of combination of uncertainties is also valid if the fractional errors Ao-j/ctj << 1. In practice, the measured fractional errors

in RCS calibration and measurements satisfy this condition. Possible exceptions might

Sections here generally follow the sections of NISTIR 5019 [1]
occur in extremely low-observable measurements, where the the target RCS is comparable

to the system noise RCS. However, such measurements are not considered in this report.

The component uncertainties in any uncertainty table can be either measurement-based,

that is, well defined measurement procedures are used to determine their magnitudes, or the RSS of a number of lower level components that are summarized in separate uncertainty

tables. An example is the second table in Table 2.1, which gives uncertainties associated

with the standard target calibration. The overall calibration uncertainty (line 4.14) is included as a contribution to the test target measurement uncertainty (line 3.13, Reference

RCS).

Measurement-based uncertainties usually reflect a worst-case estimate. The term worst

case should be operationally defined. Procedures that estimate worst-case uncertainty will

generally reflect practical experience. Statistically, we assign such worst-case estimates to represent two standard deviations, although the actual error distribution in question is unknown. Loosely speaking, a metrologist is 95% confident [2] that the actual error falls within the worst-case uncertainty bounds.

3 TEST TARGET UNCERTAINTIES

The radar equation [3-5] can be expressed as a ratio of test target RCS to calibration target

RCS:

(7a)

<^s \Rs J \ G J \fs J Prs Pi

where

a = radar cross section [m^],

R = range (distance) [m]

G — antenna gain,

/ = frequency [s~-^], Pt — transmitted (delivered) power [W],

Pr = received power [W].

The subscript s identifies quantities associated with the standard calibration target. For

example, we allow the possibility that Gg/G 7^ 1, as could result from pointing errors (which could be significant on dynamic, but neghgible on static, ranges).

Equivalently, the expression for the measured RCS in eq (7a) can also be written as [3-5]

E 2

(70 = TT ^5, (76)

Es

where E is the measured electric field. In practice, especially at indoor ranges, background

subtraction techniques can be used to improve the uncertainty in E. However, a careful

study of this technique has yet to be completed.

In this report we do not actually determine a specific target's measurement uncertainties.

In Table 2.1a we assumed arbitrary values for test-target uncertainties to illustrate the

calculation of an overall RCS uncertainty. However, we plan to pubhsh soon a separate

document detailing the determination of target uncertainties for a specific target.
Table 2.1. Etcheron Valley Range Estimated

RCS Uncertainties at 11.3 GHz.

A. Test target uncertainties [dB

3.1 Average illumination 0.40

3.2 Background-target interaction 0.50

3.3 Cross polarization 1.00

3.4 Drift 0.30

3.5 Frequency 0.16

3.6 Integration 0.10

3.7 I-Q imbalance 0.10

3.8 Near field 0.20

3.9 Noise-background 0.35

3.10 Nonlinearity 0.25

3.11 Range 0.01

3.12 Target orientation na

3.13 Reference RCS (4.14) 0.71

3.14 Combined uncertainty (RSS) 1.20

-1.70

B. Calibration target uncertainties dB]

4.1 Average illumination 0.2

4.2 Background-target interaction 0.25

4.3 Cross polarization 0.3

4.4 Drift 0.15

4.5 Frequency 0.16

4.6 Integration

4.7 I-Q imbalance 0.1

4.8 Near field

4.9 Noise-background 0.35

4.10 Nonlinearity 0.25

4.11 Range

4.12 Target orientation 0.10

4.13 Reference RCS (computation) 0.10

4.14 Combined uncertainty (RSS) 0.71
4 CALIBRATION TARGET UNCERTAINTIES

In this section we determine the cahbration uncertainty at the South 40 Etcheron Valley

Range (EVR). The various uncertainty contributions listed in Table 2.1 are individually

discussed in the following subsections.

We briefly characterize the components of calibration uncertainty and the measurement

procedures used to determine them. Some details on the system parameters are provided in

the appendices. All components of the calibration uncertainty are listed in Table 2.1(b). At

EVR the standard cylinder 22.86 cm by 10.67 cm (9.0 in by 4.2 in) was used to calibrate the

RCS system for uncertainty measurements using the four standard cylinders (see Figures

4.1 and 4.2). Manufacturing imperfections in the standard cylinder artifacts (see Table 4.1)

and errors in their computed RCS values contribute to the overall calibration uncertainty.

As shown in eq (7b) the computed value together with the measured RCS of the calibration

artifact are used to determine the calibration constant with stated uncertainties. The

calibration uncertainty is then propagated into the measurement uncertainties (see Table

2.1) to obtain the overall uncertainty of a RCS measurement.

We utilized measurements made on all the four cylinders to determine the calibration

uncertainty valid at 11.3 GHz. This uncertainty analysis is valid in the RCS range of —5

to —17 dBsm, as indicated in Table 4.1. A sphere of 30.48 cm (12 in) diameter can be

used to provide additional data and a quick check on the calibration using the cylinders.

Such a sphere mounted on a styrofoam column is shown in Figure 4.3. The cylinders were mounted similarly. The styrofoam column was located at Rs = 610 m from the

antenna. Measurements were made at 2 to 18 GHz; we will concentrate on measurements

at 11.3 GHz (for the system parameters, see Appendix B, Tables B.l, B.2 and B.3). Our

uncertainty analysis is valid for the specific parameters and system configuration used in

these measurements. In general, changes in system parameters and configurations will

change the system uncertainty.

Table 4.1 . The EVR Calibration Cyhnders.^

Designation'^ Radius^ Tolerance Height Tolerance Computed RCS^

375 9.525 ±0.0005 4.445 ±0.0005 -16.5

450 11.43 ±0.0005 5.145 ±0.0005 -14.2

750 19.05 ±0.0005 8.890 ±0.0005 -7.45

900 22.86 ±0.0005 10.668 ±0.0005 -5.12

1 Cylinders were made at NIST using Al 6061 to a surface

finish of 32 microinches AA or better.

^ Indicates the nominal radius in inches times 100

^ Dimensions and tolerances (in cm) were determined

using a Mitutoyo CMM at the NIST dimensional analysis

laboratory. An analysis report is available at the EVR

RCS measurement range.

'* Computed for the HH polarization (dBsm) to determine

calibration constants. For VV polarization, see Figure 4.2

10
Figure 4.1. The standard cylinder set adopted by the RCS community used to caHbrate the

EVR RCS measurement system from 2 to 18 GHz. The cylinders are designated according

to their diameters (in inches x 100). For dimensions with tolerances and computed cross

sections, see Table 4.1.

11
CC

l_ T3

o I— <D o

13 o

JD 2^ »*—

X >

X >

in

N

o

00o

I

lO

,.rj3»

c3

U ^

<N

9-

~n ^ r

01- 91- 02-

(msap) SOd

93- oe12
~ _ CJ O 03 (U oo c -f^ H E §

c3 c3 c "^ £ O c '^-^ --i

en c^ o ^ -a =«

2^ o cd

.&p c5 ^ £ ^ x>

13
4.1 AVERAGE ILLUMINATION

In Figure 4.1.1 we show the uncahbrated RCS of a small corner reflector as a function

of height in the neighborhood of the target measurement height. Since the response of a

corner reflector is insensitive to small changes in orientation, we assume that the observed

variations in RCS in large part demonstrate the nonplanar illumination of the target

volume. This is the result of interference pattern in the vertical direction produced by

the direct illumination and indirect ground-bounce rays. However, smaller variations in

gain (a function of direction) are also included. A large variation of approximately 6 dB

in RCS is observed over the scan heights ranging from approximately 200 to 600 cm. We

assume that the variation in the illumination pattern in the horizontal direction is due

primarily to the variation in the antenna pattern, that is, the horizontal direction does not

exhibit significant interference effects. Hence, we estimate illumination uncertainty using

field variations in the vertical direction.

The radius and height of the largest cylindrical calibration artifact used from 2 to 18

GHz are approximately 23 and 11 cm, respectively (see Table 4.1, Figures 4.1 and 4.2).

This cylinder is located at the point of maximum illumination during calibration, which

is approximately at 416 cm. A maximum variation in illumination of < 0.2 dB in RCS is observed in the range of 416 to 440 cm.

Obviously, illumination uncertainty depends on both the target and the target height. We

assumed that the upper bound uncertainty due to nonplanar illumination for an extended

target can be determined as for a small target. Then, from Figure 4.1.1, a target 200 cm

high would be subject to an illumination uncertainty of approximately 1 dB.

To determine the illumination uncertainty for a target extended in the horizontal direction,

we need horizontal field plots. Currently, such plots are not available.

Estimated uncertainty: Aa (dB) =0.2

4.2 BACKGROUND-TARGET INTERACTIONS

This contribution to RCS uncertainty comes from the interaction between the calibration

artifact (cylinder or sphere) or target and the supporting structure. The support is usually a polyfoam column or pylon.

Background-target interaction is strongest where the target and mounting mechanism are

closely coupled, due to physical proximity. Under such conditions, time gating is of no

value, and the interaction needs to be included as an uncertainty in the measurement. In

general, computer simulations could provide a good estimate of the magnitude of interaction. However, in a measurement-based approach, we can determine an upper-bound

estimate by making a few general assumptions. Such estimates can be verified using computer simulations for complex targets; for example, full-scale airplanes.

To estimate the interaction uncertainty we observe that the target-mount interaction is a complex sum of signals that have followed all possible signal paths between the transmitting

radar, the target, the pylon, and the receiving radar. For example, ArPTAt denotes the

signal path from the transmitting radar to the target, then to the pylon and back to the

14
! _!**

« •%%/4<w N • ^UAt3 I • ** ..V&nBfli^^H^^R

o I

• iwr'^-'-..-,.aa

CO I

T" II * %/««)V)MpH

II o ^^^^^^B^^H^E^^M H— Q. ii^Bflki ^^^^^HJs^^*^*"

/.-«.trfe '- L'>*'-'l

* KUte-v-.-.- •

.

• «> ^_*,s!kifi AgaaOi lai^HlKiwi:*. ^^^H^M^EVViA

• • '^,^< P?S5^ V'-V'

•• Pn?.- -lorvifc • • ir^f

• BnP^rf 'L aV^HI

***-<;* V%'^SBflHHBBSxvl.:... f «Vf...«. »*«««»»«^^»«**««»«*««»»«*. mi^- .. ^j^wp •

• * KSV: :-

K*--.1

.•WfSSi ^^ ^^HH^USi^^^^W ** A iT^P^hI

* 1

•

1 1 1

•

1

oCO

ZOt^-

(ujsap) soy

O'l-t'-

NX

o X

CO X

T~ 11 1^

II o

«^- Q.

o

4-1 C3 o N

CD ^ ^

ex o X ^

E

o

-s «

^^^^ o o

sz t^ Ifi o

C\J sz

lumination

n

ata

speci

o r= D

nplanar

oints

tak

o O CL

00

CO

asa

function

of

height

due

ton

d

line

is

the

average

of

the

data

oo U O

1^3

sured R

edded

s

^^ c3 -D Eo E §3 o .^J C -i^ o sz

tions i

or

dar '^

cd -^

fe ai > ^

. j= ^ H

o "^ N

CO

Figure 4 11.3GH

Ot'- zv-

(ujsap) sod

gt"

15
receiving radar. Similarly, we have the reciprocal path AjiTPAt- In general, all signal

paths are of the form Ar{TP)''T''At or ArIpT)''P''At, where n = I..00 and A: = or 1. The interaction / is then the sum of all signals, and can be represented as

, (PT + PTP + TP + TPT) , / — Ar- -Atwhere we choose the — sign if there is no phase change introduced in the signal paths. To

estimate the target-mount interaction, we assume that

1. The monostatic calibration target and background measurements give the upper

bounds of all possible bistatic RCS of the target and pylon, and

2. The second and fourth terms in the interaction I are an order of magnitude smaller

than the first and third terms, and can therefore be neglected.

Then

|/| ^ \Ar{PT + TP)At\ < a\AR{PATART + TAtArP)At\ = 2a\ARPAT\\ARTAT\,

where a is a scalar chosen to satisfy the above expression. If assumption 1 above holds,

then a ^ I gives the upper bound for the target-mount interaction.

Since the received signal is 5 = ArTAt and the background signal is B = ArPAt, the

dimensionaless interaction-to-signal ratio e/ is

e/ = 2a\ARPAT\ = 2a\B\. (4.2.1)

Equation (4.2.1) defines the dimensions of a. Hence, we can use the background (clutter)

RCS data (see Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2) to estimate this interaction. We could use a

geometrical argument to estimate a as the weighted ratio of the curved cylindrical surface

to the total surface area of the cylinder. However, the weighting constant is difficult to

estimate using basic considerations. Instead, we use the upper bound a — 4.5.

|e7| = 9|5|.

Thus, the upper bound of the target-mount interaction is estimated to be 19 dB above the

background measurement.

If we specify e/ in decibels, then the target-mount uncertainty is given by

A(7dB = -201og(l- 10-^^/20).

From Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 we see that the background signal l^l'^ ^ —50 dBsm for the

vertical polarization; ej is then estimated to be —31 dB.

Estimated uncertainty: Act (dB) = 0.25

16
CO

»—^

^^NX

(3

XX '—' c

>, o oc m

Q)

N

13 ^— cr CT5 0) O

LL CL I I I o

CDO

CD

02- Ot^- 09-

(ujsap) soa

08- 001.-

T3

1- c

(U 3 « 2 E tio c3 .^ ^ CJ T3 ra ^-^X) c oj • '^ r- CN ^ V ^ • _ C P^M , O^

CJ -t; « rt C» N ^ -c o i2

(U G- ^E

Q==

0) u:£- u m ;0 <K en 52o \- T3 f*^ o<

LL " rt ^^ <4— ., 1-

cc

ard

set

40

ran: <zo -^s

rt 3

1- ^ 9 < «^^

DC 5^

cn

O

C

_i ^ <=> < Q z o edR oise 1 =

00C

4) c3 ^^ ^O 3^ ^ ca 'u ," "^ lyj o § c P

5, ao-o

•c .^

O

1-2 _o E „

D. o ^ 4) o t:

S3 <^ 3

.2.1. 12a ^ C/5 Ol u a 'o ^ k> c 3 0) CiO^ TD

•rr ci.

C

Pi 53 C3

17
CO

T—^

^u^ NXo >>

""

—

C

>^ o o '+-' c 0^

CD

N

Z3 ^_

D" 05O

LL Q_ I II

oz-

~n I OV- 09-

(ujsgp) sOd

CD

CM

CO

CO 00 1-o C < >. LL u

<+-

H o

DC

-4—»

Ql o <

DC

99

_i<o

OQ

08- 001--

*- s

"^ -^ S .2

'C o<T) ^o

<D ft ^>

Q>oOO

00

0)co ou

-a

in

C3Oco(/I

(/J "S . m £

X) .^ O cd box)

XIc

(N

<N

'^

bO

<u o ^ c <u J" ^ S

18
4.3 CROSS POLARIZATION

Here we account for the fact that, due to misalignment or physical imperfection, the

antenna will not transmit or receive perfectly polarized {h or v) signals. However, even if the antennas have good polarization isolation, we can experience significant error in the

co-polar RCS if the target's cross-polar hv or vh response is large compared to the co-polar

hh or vv response.

We can fully correct for polarization errors if complete polarimetric calibration and measurements are performed [6-8]. Most RCS ranges do have the capability to perform polarimetric calibration and measurements, but only a few test programs require this.

We define the scattering matrix parameters:

r^i/ antenna receiving coefficients,

t^jy antenna transmitting coefficients,

s^^ target scattering-matrix elements,

where u and /i are either v ot h for vertical or horizontal polarization, respectively The

received signal (when transmitting vertically) is [6-8]

or

for a reciprocal [2] monostatic measurement system. We rewrite eq (4.3.1) as

Syv 'VV

2 i^vv 'vv^vv'wx^ I ^ I o /• I't.O.Z)

The first term on the right of eqs (4.3.1) or (4.3.2) is the received copolar signal Svv\ the

second {vK) and third [hK) terms are the cross-polarization signals. Prom eq (4.3.2) the

cross-polarization terms are of first and second order in the antenna polarization-isolation

ratio

Pvh = I I << 1,

T^vv when the antenna is in the vertical polarization state. When we interchange the indices h

and f, we obtain the expression valid for the horizontal polarization state. In general, we

expect pyh. to be small.

Equation (4.3.2) shows that the cross-polarization error is target dependent; the equation

has three ratio parameters that determine the magnitude of the cross-polarization error. The ratio of the cross-polarization error terms in eq (4.3.2) is

1 Shh ryh

^ ^vh ^vv

which is not necessarily small, even if the antenna polarization isolation is small.

19
Weakly polarizing targets. For a non-depolarizing target, Sy^ — 0. For a weakly polarizing

target

Svh ~ 0.

If Shh >> Syh, the error is of second order in pyh, but could still be large if s^h/syy >> 1.

Strongly depolarizing target. By definition, we have strongly depolarizing targets when the

ratio of the two cross-polarization terms in eq (4.3.2) satisfies

h^!j±\<l, (4.3.3) ^ '->vn ' vv Eq (4.3.2) can in general be written as

where a is some complex constant. When a = 2 the two error terms in eq (4.3.2) are equal,

and when a = 1 the last term in eq (4.3.2) has been neglected (strong depolarization).

The error now is of first order in pyh, but its magnitude still depends on the ratio of the

target's crosspolar Syh and copolar Syy scattering characteristics.

As an example, we assume a strongly depolarizing unknown target with a — 2 and Syy —

Syh, so that the error signal is AS

c(0) Oyy = 4

rvh

where AS = Syy — SyJ . Thus

Acr(dB) = -20 log (l - 4 X 10-'^/^°)

, (4.3.5)

where €p = 20\og {ryh/ryy) is the antenna polarization isolation. If the polarization isolation is €p = 30 dB, then the cross-polarization component uncertainty is 1.2 dB.

Estimated uncertainty: Act (dB) = 1.20 (strong depolarization)

Estimated uncertainty: Act (dB) = 0.30 (weak depolarization, by assumption)

4.4 DRIFT

All radar systems are subject to drift due to variations in environmental conditions. On

outdoor ranges, changes in temperature can cause signal variations; similarly, wind and

humidity can also influence the results of measurements. To study system drift we need

to observe and characterize {i) short-term, {'li) intermediate-term, and (iii) long-term drifts

in the received signal. Simple analysis of drift data should enable us to determine the

corresponding calibration and measurement uncertainties. We define short-term drift as the

variation in the received signal during a calibration interval; in this study the calibration

interval was 20 s, and we used the standard cyUnder set to make drift measurements.

Simultaneous recordings of temperature, wind velocity and humidity are highly desirable.

20
The corresponding uncertainty can be used in the Calibration Target Uncertainties table

(see Table 2.1).

We define intermediate-term drift as the variation in the received signal during a measure- ment interval. In practice, this is the interval between pre-calibration and post-calibration

measurements that bracket the measurements on a test target. This could be between

2 and 12 hours, and will depend on the details of the test plan. Simultaneous recordings of temperature, wind velocity and humidity are highly desirable. The corresponding

uncertainty can be used in the Test Target Uncertainties table (see Table 2.1).

We define long-term drift as the drift observed during an extended period, for example,

12 to 24 hours. Such observations are used to monitor system performance and stabihty,

but are not used to determine system uncertainties. During such measurements the temperature, wind conditions and humidity, as functions of time, should also be recorded. A

historical data base can help identify unexpectedly large variations during measurements

of long-term drift. Such large variations must be understood, and, if necessary, corrective measures should be taken to improve overall system stability.

We now describe how we determined the (i) short-term, (ii) intermediate-term and (iii) long-term drifts.

Short-term drift. We used the standard calibration cylinders to determine the shortterm drift of the radar system. The corresponding uncertainty is used in the Calibration

Target Uncertainty table. Each of the four cylinders was measured for 20 s. The variations

in the received signals are shown in Figures 4.4.1 and 4.4.2. We define drift during the

measurements on a particular cylinder as the range of the received signals expressed in

decibels. The system short-term drift is then defined as the maximum range observed

during the measurements on the four cyhnders. We observed drifts of approximately 0.10,

0.06, 0.10, and 0.08 dB for the HH polarization, and 0.10, 0.06, 0.06 and 0.15 dB for

the VV polarization for cyhnders A, B, C, and D, respectively. Then, by definition the

calibration or short-term drift at 11.3 GHz is observed to be 0.15 dB. This observation is valid at signal levels of —5 to —17 dBsm, the RCS range of the four cyhnders.

Additionally, in Figure 4.4.3 we show the drift during measurements made on a sphere

of 30.48 cm (12 in) diameter. We observe the drift to be < 0.15 dB, which is the drift

calibration uncertainty as determined above.

Intermediate-term drift. The overall configuration of the components of the RCS measurement system is outhned in Appendix B. To assess the cause of intermediate-term drift

in the overall RCS measurement system, three diff'erent test configurations were used. The

first tested the stability of the radar electronics in the radar room, which are common to

all of the operational bands of the radar. The second configuration added the S, C, X and

Ku Hoffman boxes to the radar electronics included in the first test. The third test had

the radar configured for RCS measurements and used cylinder A on a foam column as the

target. The system was not calibrated for this stability test. Because of limitations in the

data acquisition software we were limited to observation times of 10,000 seconds or less. Typically, we observed the system drift for about 8,000 seconds. Longer-term observations

will be made once the data acquisition software has been updated.

21
E 1 . 'Jt •'. ' CO

LO V' ^ •'**'.

'"

(1) 3 .;if^ 1^

CD>

0) 11 .

• /'-'' 0) N

Q. 3 C £ o

U- D-

(J .' '

1 • ' • /::<•:

••' V. • ;•}:>;. .

', .% ;•. ,' .^.'^'"•' .•i«'-.*"..

• V..'-, . '•'•>''

<•;'.'' = ;>V'."

. •'»

I '.* *•'•• •/«

• •.-..• ^'•

. • -. » .. vv:.".-

•••"A--.

••..'...v.-.- •/' • » '•'. :'-.^'

.

• ' r ; ••^' • •\.\« r *•*•

' •••*;,*'*

. '* * • •

'

, '•:*/.' "

1 1 1 1 1

C

WL- 9Vl- SVl- 09-1- 2S'^ - i

Emo

CO

irj il %

D

TO c ra 0) N

3 c jjft cr n3 =: £ o Tt Q. U. Q. ^'

'& 8

. >•• •

J/* \

.jC->

<

1 1 1 1 1 1

1

09-91-

• . ^''}*\ n

^—

^—^^NX X

X

c

>. o

a>

-1 c (T 03

dJ o

U- a

- ^ (U

• •'*.'''

* c •

n

99-91-

1

09-91.- 9991- OZ-91.-

E

« • * * ' * .

, '^. •0 n- . * ^i^ • .•.;•/:> •''

'

in ^^ c >

•''.•!•••.»:

i:.

. Q

£

.•••.•••^«-

. LL. Q.

•» •/•.,;.. ;

• »'^" .'

. ^- . \ '•. ° 0) .' ••« ' ,* a *' '**•'.#

' c *;'.••• >^ * *''• j.."

, t

IT)

• •• . •"•• '*••' ' *

1 1 1 1

C T3

- ^ <u

06-*^ 96-t^ 009- 909-

(Lusgp) soa

019- 919- eo't't- Ol.-t'l-- ZVvV t'l't'i- grt'i.-

iz) JS

•-. I

g ^

u- lU

i" C/D H

3 u i^n

1/3 "1 oi c

D Tt L

e 3

T3

00u §

oi td Wl x; N

c

•c3 <^

T3c 3

6

>

>

Tl U

1> X J=

0)

rt .1^ e c

C/5

1) (jO ^ rt u H T3 pD ^

^'

(1)

(/J 03

2i

-0

1/3 ^

3 't~< in

&u

•c

^^

Uh T3

("Jsgp) soa

22
Fw

•*l-. •"l^. o CO

CO "ir-. -

hi

ro>D ^c 2 % aE •1 S o oo

LL Q.

•:•«

m

L.

0) >;•

T3 ->v' C -^ ^ 1 1 1 1

0) «3

I— ""

sez- Ot'Z- St'Z- 091- 90-91.- 01.-91- 9191- 0391.- 93-91- 0£-9l-

'*^,-.

h .•^>

00

ni ••<..•• ,_

T3o •:^*

CNJ '^5-

X <

^^ c > >• o .9

"O *•«• cr CD '-./• • f- o

D.Eo

U. Q. o

•^;;;' .

«* <

i0}

^^.. *.»>* •oc jfi' • ">« •5:- o ' *..

.•.*•• 1 1 1 o

0) •a>.o

CO

V—

^—

>:. X ^c >-

03Nc a ra

CD o

u. Q_ ' -v.*.'.

•I

'ii.: %.if

4.

039- 939- Oe-9- (msgp) soy

9e-9- 00-t'l.- 90-t'l.- ort-i-

(Lusgp) SDb 1

91.-fl.- 103-ft- c

-§ o <u

^—J x:

f3

H

•r" . rto Tf

D- Tf > fl) > 3

1)M

4-* Uh c (O

-—^ ' ^^

(]>

C/5 ^ O cO C<^1 C3 _^ Ni

.*—) n

00 P. >> c T3

Q

C

rt T3 E T3 ^K

-o (1) >. c J= O

Fi c

Vi JZ o

<u o V3 X5 3 co

Vi

.5 E c 3

00 E

r3 03

u. (U

Si on E 3 U nn

a; c m Tt u E t

C/5 3

T3

U o

Cc5 Xi ^-t O fS w N c

•c i ^ 3 (^. o

iS ^ o

time

(s

drift E > 3E >

T3 (U 1 E

C/3 X)o

4) t/3

T3

J= C3 (U H T3 n

cs o

Tt

4)

iid Tl- T3

CQ ^

C/3 -o 3

CO c

in

Uh •o o

23
00

CN

ino

00

OJ

o

-'^ CO

CMd

o

CN

in

00CNd

.

• Frequency (GHz): 11.3

. Polarization: HH

u

• ,

• •*• •

• • .••••/. '

.• •:.'.• .•.•:•;«: •.'^"

I • • • ,•• ^,* , •*••• , ••.*

• % m ••• • ,. •• • V

•• .. ;' '.''••' • • 0' : ' 'J. ...

'3. •••%'..;'.•.•. •"• *•'?*.-;!.*

' '.'.*.'•" ••';'•*.;,, :•'/.;

• ••••• • '•

,

1 1 1 1 10 15

oCO

CN

mCN

CN

CvJ o

w

O

"^ o

CN

N.

CNi

CNd

Frequency (GHz): 11.3 V .• ;••'

Polarization: W * * •

• **• • * ,rr

* • * W^ *

• * • *' -' . •

• •• . • •"

« . • •

*'•' '%.••.*:*• •>• .'.'

. . •. ..'>*'

. ' '• •l'

• .•.•.•••,•••: .» • - V*

: ..•

•• ..' •;. >•...;. '

•• •:*.•.• -v.

*

. •: ' /

• »*• *" • ••

.

• .* *'

. .',' • • •-• • . ..y: '. - • ... '•'.''.- ' •'..*•

.* ». ..»..' '.' • .' ."'."' '" ' • '. •'...* .'••*. . J,

. •.••' .'*•"

• .'

* '

'•*

.. ' .;*•.**. \'' ' t

•

: '•"'. ••.•'•• •*; .''•

. *." 'V

'•'

*•*•

• I

•" "V.•w""!.

•

•

• \\.- ..•..;',•*.. • • . ' . •*•*.•*

• •. * •. ..» * ,

t. '

'

1 1 1 1 10 15

time (sec)

Figure 4.4.3. The observed drift during RCS measurements at 1 1.3 GHz on a 30.48 cm

(12 in) diameter sphere. The drift, defined as the maximum range in the observed data,

is determined to be < 0.15 dB.

24
The first test measured the system drift attributable to the electronics located in the radar room. For this test the 2 GHz IF transmit pulse was looped back into the 2 GHz IF receive

input of the HH and VV channels through an attenuator. No unusual sources of drift were

noted in this testing, but the testing did allow fine tuning of the cycling of the radar room

air conditioning system to minimize the drift in the radar room electronics.

The second test added the S, C, X, and Ku band rf components in the S, C, X, and Ku

Hoffman boxes (located close to the associated antennas) to the electronics used in the

first test. This was a closed-loop test: the HH and VV rf transmitter pulses were looped

back into the respective receiver inputs through rf pads chosen to set the signal level in

each of the four Hoffman boxes. Observations were made at 3.5 7.1, 9.3, and 16.5 GHz,

which are the center frequencies of the high S, high C, low X and high Ku sub-bands,

respectively. Both the HH and W polarizations at all four frequencies were observed

simultaneously using an eight-element waveform. The measurements were made at night

to duplicate typical test conditions. The maximum drift observed at 9.3 GHz was 0.1

dB for the VV polarization (see Figure 4.4.4), and was 0.2 dB at 16.5 GHz for the HH

polarization. Improved temperature stability of the Hoffman boxes would likely reduce

this source of drift.

For the third test the system was in its operational configuration, with the 900 calibration

cylinder (see Figure 4.1 and Table 4.1) mounted on a foam column. Simultaneous drift

measurements at the four frequencies for both the HH and VV polarizations were made

with the eight- element waveform used in the second test.

Full system-drift measurements were made by use of a 900 calibration cylinder (see Figure

4.1 and Table 4.1) as the target. The same eight-element waveform (see above) was used

to simultaneously observe the system drift at the center frequencies of the four bands for

both polarizations. Again these measurements were made at night to duplicate typical

test conditions. During the night-time measurements the temperatures were cold enough

that attention was given to adequate heating of the Hoffman boxes to control signal drift

originating in the Hoffman boxes. The S band HoflFman box had four transmitters that

could be put in standby mode to provide the required heat load. The other Hoffman boxes

had only two transmitters; the C band appeared to be more sensitive to temperature than

the X or Ku bands, so an available floor heater was used to deliver additional heating to

the C-band Hoffman box. A maximum drift of 0.2 dB was observed at 16.5 GHz for the

HH polarization. We observed drift at 9.3 GHz but not at 11.3 GHz; the observed drift

was 0.3 dB for both polarizations, as shown in Figure 4.4.5. We can assume that this is the test target uncertainty for all of X band, since only the limiters change when switching

frequencies within a band.

Long-term drift. We define long-term drift as drift occuring in a period of 12 to 24 hours.

Currently the data-collecting algorithm does not allow us to collect data for longer than

10,000 seconds. A new algorithm is being implemented to eliminate this limitation. We

will study the long-term system drift in detail after this improvement is operational.

Estimated uncertainty: Act (dB) = 0.15 for short-term drift (caHbration)

Estimated uncertainty: Acr (dB) = 0.30 for intermediate-term drift (target)

25
o

o

o00

o

o

oCD

o

o

o

o

o

CM

2 _ D 1^ O C ^- C

c/3 t^ S

o <u o

o

o

CD

O

92't'- 0£P- Kt'-

(Lusgp) soy

sen-

(Lusgp) soy

ec'k

O C 3 ^ i'S -

(U o _^ -^ ^

'> <*- o

o ^ c S $f^ li e ^

C o is oo — — <s ^

S § 3 B

C C K/ c3

1^ <£ P c gn -T3 .5 S o c x §K ^^ o

f- "^ - cd g^U

u £ c/5 ci

5 o c <u O o o 0^

:£-§ g 2i 2 2 5^

o s> ^ ^

O c «^ "^ n c ° s

^ C5 (U *^ S ^ o

'C ^

•^ fe § o

r- > C C

V <u H =^

<u ^ 5 -S ^ ^ " S

H Wh r26
„ CO <o

§ N E.^.-t•i

^ £ C -«ri"

• ««M • .,M«

••c;

'•^•.

^

^

^••••^r^ t

>•

** *^^^ V

O

oCO

oo

o

CD

o

o

o

o

o

CM

- o

to ro

o> d

§;l^

o

oo00

S9'62- SZ62- S862-

(^sgp) SOU

oesk ot^si- 0S81-

(Lusgp) soy

oo

o

CD

O

o

o

o

oeg

co

k.

.E

'>^

CJ o

ON

c

E

3

0)eU

H

-a c

uc

o

CuE

o

o

J3

03

(/3 (J

U

o

N

O

en

•c

4-J

-oco

o

uo

oo

>>

E

'>< o

ex

CI- {« a

0)

c:

oo X)o

-4—) c

a

<u

(SO c

C3

o

>c

<uo

3

T3 O

T3 H

in

JZH

d

E

_3

O

13C

o

3 E X)

27
4.5 FREQUENCY

From eq (7a) the component of uncertainty in RCS due to uncertainty in frequency is

A(7(dB) = -201og(l- ^). (4.5.1)

The uncertainty A/ in frequency may be taken as the effective bandwidth of the system;

that is, as the minimum of the transmitted bandwidth and the received bandwidth. This assumes that the bandwidth is not affected by digital filtering in software gating. At

/ = 9.3 GHz, we use A/ = 200 MHz to obtain the uncertainty.

Estimated uncertainty Acr (dB) = 0.16

4.6 INTEGRATION

Integration uncertainty is due to target motion occuring during a number of pulses that are integrated within the hardware and/or software. Ideally this motion is entirely negligible,

but in windy conditions the calibration might move by a significant fraction of a wavelength.

The uncertainty due to the uncertainty in position AR during the pulse integrations is

AT?

Ac7(dB) = -401og(l - —-). (4.6.1) R

Most likely this is negligible, since R is very large compared to the wavelength.

Estimated uncertainty Aa (dB) —

4.7 I-Q IMBALANCE

If there is an I-Q imbalance, the measured amplitude will be a function of input phase.

I-Q imbalance was measured with the radar by feeding the transmitted IF pulse at 2 GHz

through a step attenuator and a manual phase shifter back to the IF H or V input channel.

Data were obtained for a number of coherent integrations (NCI) (within the hardware)

and attenuation levels as a function of phase. Specifically, NCI was set to 2, 4, 8, 16, and

32 and the attenuation levels were set at to 50 dB in 10 dB steps.

The orthogonal-distance regression (ODR) technique [1-3] was used to determine the I-Q

circle that best fits the measurements. The ODR parameters provide the DC offset and

the uncertainty in the radius of the IQ circle. The total measurement uncertainty is then

defined as the RSS of the DC offset and the radial uncertainty.

In Figure 4.7.1 we show the H-channel I-Q circularity data and the I-Q circles as determined by the least-squares analysis using ODRPACK [12] for NCI of 2 and 8 pulses and

attenuation levels of dB and 50 dB. The + at the center of the circle indicates the DC

offset of the measurement system. The uncertainty in the radius of the circle is automatically determined from the data by ODRPACK. The uncertainties were determined by use

of the expressions

AJo-^Io+Ql + ^r^, (4.7.1)

28
~~*'''^^^^^^^::::^ata o N\

O /

^ \

o

o 1

1

o

- J o

-

1 i 1 1

5. C

1

1

CD

\ A

t i 1 1 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2

lO -^ rO * cos(th)

04 -0.4 -02 0.0 0.2

iO + rO cos(th)

04

o _ o ..^.^^^

o ^y ^N;.

- //' \ U5 / r \

o _ o

o /

\

o - oo

o

~ o \ y \

:l

- v •/

8-

o X^^'•^^ „,--'

^

1 I 1 1 1 1 -0.0015 -0.0005 0,0005

iO + rO ' cos{th)

0.0015 -0.0015 -0.0005 0.0

iO + rO * cos(th)

1 r

0.0005 0010 0.0015

Figure 4.7.1. The I-Q circularity as a function of attenuation and NCI. (A) dB attenuation and

NCI=2; (B) dB attenuation and NCI=8; (C) 50 dB attenuation and NCI=2; (D) 50 dB attenuation

and NCI=8. The data are indicated in blue (dotted), and the IQ circles obtained using ODRPACK

are drawn in red (solid). The + signs at (IO,QO) indicate the centers of the circles, which give the

DC offsets. The total measurement uncertainty is defined as the RSS of the DC offset and the

uncertainty in the radius rO of the IQ circle.

29
where (Jo, Qo) is the complex DC offset, and 5r is the uncertainty in the radius ro of the

I-Q circle, and

AadB = 201og(l - A/g/ro). (4.7.2)

The total I-Q uncertainties for each of the measurements in Figure 4.7.1 are given in Table 4.7.1. We see that the I-Q uncertainty is not a sensitive function of the NCI, but is somewhat more strongly dependent on the attenuation level. We choose the maximum uncertainty (rounded to the nearest 10th of a dB) in Table 4.7.1 as the system I-Q uncertainty.

Table 4.7.1. The I-Q uncertainty as a function of

attenuation and NCI.

dB/NCI 2 8

0.04 0.04

50 0.11 0.10

Estimated uncertainty: Aa (dB) = 0.10

4.8 NEAR FIELD

The small calibration cylinder is in the far-field of the antenna. Therefore, the near-field

uncertainty is negligible.

Estimated uncertainty: Aa (dB) =

4.9 NOISE - BACKGROUND

In Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 we show the RCS measurements of the system noise, the background and clutter, and the calibration cylinders. The cylinders and the background and

clutter are measured coherently, but the system noise is measured incoherently. Both the

background and system noise signals are significantly lower than the RCS of the cylinders.

System Noise. We first cahbrate the radar system, and then record the RCS of the system

noise after the bracket pulse has been disabled from the radar transmitter to suppress rf transmission. This is accomplished either by disconnecting the bracket cable going to the

transmitter or by turning off the bracket pulse in the collection computer. System noise

is measured for a predetermined period by use of a waveform identical to that used in the

test target measurements.

From Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 we find that the maximum [A^'p = —70 dBsm, which occurs

in the HH polarized noise measurements. We use this value to determine the system

background-noise uncertainty.

Background Measurements. The background or clutter measurement is identical to a caUbration or test-target measurement without the target. Thus, the reflected signal originates

only from the environment and the pylon. We expect this signal to be substantially below

the signal produced by the calibration and test targets, but it is usually higher than the

system noise.

From Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 we see that the maximum \B\'^ = —45 dBsm, which occurs

30
for the HH polarized background measurement. We use this value to determine the system

background-noise uncertainty.

The overall background-noise is the complex sum of B and N, and

\B + Nf ^ |5|2 = -45 dBsm,

since the noise A'' is significantly less than the background (clutter) RCS.

The uncertainty in the system noise-background during cahbration is determined using the

theoretical RCS of cylinder D, which is —16.5 dBsm for the HH polarization. Thus

e= |5/B|2 = 28.50 dB,

and

AaBN = -201og(l - 10-^/2°) « 0.35 dB.

Obviously, the accuracy of RCS measurements would be notably improved if we could

minimize the magnitude of noise-background uncertainty. Measurement techniques to

minimize the contribution of the background (clutter) present on the range are under

study [9-10].

Estimated uncertainty: Act (dB) — 0.35

4.10 NONLINEARITY

The linearity measurements at S, C, X, and Ku bands were made using a closed-loop configuration in the environmental enclosures (Hoffman boxes). Each Hoffman box contains a

rf converter, transmitters (nominally four each), and a switch pack. The switch pack contains the HH and VV limiters for the high and low sub-bands, sub-band switching for the

high and low sub-bands, and rf step-attenuators and low-noise HH and W preamplifiers.

The Hoffman boxes are located close to the antennas.

The rf transmitter drive pulse from the converter was connected to the receiver input

through a manually controlled HP step attenuator that had been cahbrated at NIST. The

two-section step attenuator consisted of an 11-step section with 1 dB/step attenuation,

and a 7-step section with 10 dB/step attenuation. The rf pads in series with the step

attenuator provided the appropriate starting signal level for each hnearity measurement.

The step attenuator was located outside the Hoffman boxes to keep the boxes closed during

the measurements. The desired attenuation was set manually at predetermined intervals

measured with a stopwatch. The received signals as a function of attenuation levels were

recorded for each frequency of interest.

In Figure 4.10.1 we show the attenuation data for 1 dB and 10 dB attenuation. The spurious signals present in the data when the attenuators were switched have been supressed.

In Figure 4.10.2 we show the change in signal levels as the attenuation level is increased;

in Figure 4.10.3 we show the deviation of the change in signal levels from the nominal

step values of 1 dB or 10 dB. We see from these figures that system nonlinearity is very

acceptable from to 55 dB attenuation. Increased attenuation beyond this level, however,

31
o

o

o

o

COd

CMo

CMo

CDo

d)

1 1 1 1 1 r 10 20 30 40 50

time (sec)

50 100 150 200

time (sec)

O

o

CD

CNi CD

CD

CD

CD

O

CD

O

-1 1

\

1 r 10 20 30 40 50

00

CD

CD

time (sec)

100 150

time (sec)

CN .

CQ-^O

a:

CD

CO .

CQ

COo

on

o

CM

o

o

CD

-I 1 1 1 1 r 10 20 30 40 50

Figure 4.10.1. Nonlinearity measurements at 11.3 GHz in 1 dB and 10 dB steps. The I and Q plots

show the real-time data, and the RCS plots in dB are obtained from the sum of squares of I and Q.

The spurious data observed when switching attenuation levels have been suppressed. We observe

significant nonlinearity only below -60 dB (see Figure 4.10.2).

32
CM r-

— -* _

C3

(Xi

CD

3D ^

precision attenuator level (dB)

£_:'

R

CDD o

f^J C3 1 C

ai

.o D '^

a> 1

1=3

to

O! r-1

lii ilTj

8-

o

O

-p.n -60

[ -40

~~r~

-20

precision attenuator level (dB)

Figure 4.10.2. Measured signal as a function of precision attenuator levels in decibels at 11.3 GHz.

33
CNJ o

QQ

Q03

Z3C

B-*—

'

03C

g

'c/5 'o

CD o

o

co^ ':" TO o > 1 CD

O

00

CDD

Q. LO

CD CM

(/)

\_O

TO o

=3 r\j J_

Q)m LO ro

^

COo

^ o

a. •^ E

oi—

LT) c

o O

l'CT! >

CD o

TD o

10 -8 -6 -4

precision attenuator steps (dB)

-80 -60 -40 -20

precision attenuator steps (dB)

Figure 4.10.3. The deviation of the change in signal levels from the nominal

step values of 1 dB (top) or 10 dB (bottom) at 1 1.3 GHz. The nonlinearity

observed at greater than 60 dB attenuation is most likely due to rf leakage.

34
shows significant departures from linearity. The nonhnearity is more pronounced as the

attenuation is increased. This is probably due to cable-to-cable rf signal coupling around

the attenuator, but the cause has not been ascertained.

Based on the signal difference data in Figure 4.10.3 we determined the upper bound of the

system nonlinearity uncertainty to be 0.25 dB for signal levels between and —60 dB.

Estimated uncertainty Act (dB) = 0.25

4.11 RANGE

The uncertainty in RCS due to uncertainty in range R is given by [1] AD

Aa(dB) = -401og(l - —), (4.11.1)

where the error in the range AR is taken to be some fraction of the calibration target

dimension along the radar-to-target line of sight. From Tables 4.1 and B.2 (see Appendix

B) we see that the fractional error in eq (4.11.1) is very small. Hence, the uncertainty in

RCS due to range error is negligible, that is, less than 0.01 dB.

Estimated uncertainty Act (dB) =

4.12 TARGET ORIENTATION

The error in orientation of a calibration target can lead to large errors in the measured RCS

of the target (relative to the RCS computed for the orientation assumed in the modeling).

We cari use computer simulations to determine the RCS as a function of orientation. The

uncertainty is given by

Aa(dB) = -101og(l - ^—). (4.12.1)

OU (J We have not performed the required computer simulations, but we will assume here an

uncertainty of 0.1 dB.

Estimated uncertainty Act (dB) = 0.1

4.13 REFERENCE RCS (COMPUTATION)

The uncertainty in the reference RCS, which is obtained computationally, is due to two

effects: (1) the computer codes do not compute exact theoretical values, (that is, there

is a computational error), and (2) the actual physical calibration artifact has physical

imperfections, whereas the computer model of the ideal shape of the artifact is exact. The

generally accepted uncertainty here is 0.1 dB.

Estimated uncertainty Act (dB) = 0.1

4.14 COMBINED CALIBRATION UNCERTAINTY (RSS)

Here we obtain the RSS of the component uncertainties in sections 4.1 through 4.13 (see

eq (5), Section 2).

Estimated uncertainty Act (dB) = 0.71

35
5 CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY

We have presented a measurement-based uncertainty analysis of the cahbration of the RCS

measurement system at EVR, NAVAIR at China Lake, CA. All sources of uncertainy were examined and an overall calibration uncertainty was obtained at ILS GHz. All assumptions were clearly identified and stated. The worst-case for each component uncertainty was

obtained so that no assumptions about statistical distributions needed to be made. The

overall uncertainty was obtained by the use of RSS. The procedure followed in this study can be easily repeated at any frequency of interest.

Acknowledgement. This work was supported by the DoD triservice Calibration Coordination Group (CCG). Special thanks are extended to H. Click, M. Cunevalis, and R.

Cleland of the Microwave Subgroub for their long-term support.

36
REFERENCES

[I] R. C. Wittmann, M. H. Francis, L. A. Muth, and R. L. Lewis, Proposed uncertainty

analysis for RCS measurements, National Institute of Standards and Technology NISTIR

5019, January 1994.

[2] J. R. Taylor, An introduction to error analysis, the study of uncertainties in physical

measurements, 2nd Edition, Unversity Science Books, Sausalito, CA, 1982.

[3] G. T. Ruck, D. E. Barrick, W. D. Stuart, and C. K. Krichbaum, Radar Cross Section

Handbook. New York: Plenum, 1970.

[4] J. Krauss, Antennas, Second Edition, pp. 587-591, McGraw Hill, New York, 1988.

[5] L. Blake, Radar Range Performance Analysis, pp. 249-253, Artech House, Inc., MA,

1986.

[6] R. L. Lewis, L. A. Muth, and R. C. Wittmann, Polarimetric calibration of reciprocalantenna radars, National Institute of Standards and Technology NISTIR 5033, March

1995.

[7] L. A. Muth, R. L. Lewis, and R. C. Wittmann, Polarim,etric calibration of reciprocalantenna radars, AMTA Proceedings, pp. 3-8, Wilhamsburg, 1995.

[8] L. A. Muth, R. C. Wittmann, and W. Parnell, Polarimetric calibration of nonreciprocal

radar systems, AMTA Proceedings, pp. 389-393, Seattle, 1996.

[9] L. A. Muth, Phase dependence in radar cross section measurements, National Institute

of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1522, September 2001.

[10] L. A. Muth and T. Conn, Phase- dependent RCS measurements, AMTA Proceedings,

pp. 216-221, Cleveland, 2002.

[II] P. T. Boggs and J. E. Rogers, Orthogonal distance regression, Contemporary Mathematics, p. 112, 1990.

[12] P. T. Boggs, R. H. Byrd, J. R. Donaldson, R. B. Schnabel, Algorithm 676 - ODRPACK:

Software for weighted orthogonal distance regression, ACM Trans. Math. Software, 15,

1989.

37
Appendix A.

INTERPRETATION OF UNCERTAINTY

In the main text we presented a formalism for uncertainty analysis. Here we briefly discuss

the motivation for our procedure, especially regarding guidelines presented in a recent NIST

publication [2]. For more detail, see [2]. Uncertainties are commonly divided into the categories "random" (type A) and "systematic" (type B). Unfortunately, there seems to be no clear practical distinction between

random and systematic, and we have made little attempt to distinguish these types of uncertainties in the main body of this report. We assume that any appropriate actions (such

as averaging and background subtraction) already have been taken to mitigate uncertainty.

The remaining uncertainties are evaluated as Type B uncertainties.

The treatment of Type B uncertainty in [2] is statistically motivated and is based on a

generalized concept of probability [3]. The experimenter assigns a (prior) distribution

for each parameter reflecting his or her "personal degree of belief" that the parameter

might have some value. We may then apply a probabilistic analysis to estimate combined

uncertainty. In this approach, we naturally specify uncertainty in terms of probability, but

this probability must be interpreted as a subjective belief and cannot (and must not) be

interpreted in the usual random-variable (frequency) sense. To avoid confusion, we have

de-emphasized probability, and have simply used the term "reasonable." This practice

appropriately begs the question "just what is reasonable, anyway?"

Let us assume that a worst-case uncertainty is equivalent to a 2-sigma uncertainty. [We

write out sigma (standard deviation) to distinguish it from a (RCS).] That is, at least

for a normal distribution, we are 95 % certain that the error is bounded by our worstcase estimate. Under this hypothesis, the procedure of [2] is essentially identical to ours. However, the NIST document recommends reporting 1-sigma bounds for components of

uncertainty and 2-sigma bounds for expanded (overall) uncertainties. In this report w^e

define the worst-case component and overall uncertainties as 2-signia bounds.

38
Appendix B.

THE EVR RADAR SYSTEM CONFIGURATION, PARAMETERS AND

OPERATING CONDITIONS

The South 40 measurement range (see Figures 1.1 and 1.2) consists of the antenna farm

capable of transmitting and receiving all linear polarizations at the frequencies shown in

Table B.l. The four environmental Hoffman boxes that house the rf components for the

S, C, X, and Ku bands are located close to the antennas in the antenna farm. The rf components in each Hoffman box include a rf converter, transmitters (nominally four per

box), and a switch pack. The switch pack contains the HH and VV limiters for the high

and low sub-bands, sub-band switching, rf step attenuators, and low noise HH and VV

preamplifiers. The receive and transmit components common to these four bands, as well as other radar bands, are located in a nearby temperature-controlled radar room. The data examined in this report were taken at the South 40 measurement range. The

available frequency bands are given in Table B.l. The system configuration and parameters used in the measurements studies in this report are summarized in Tables B.2. The

complete set of parameters available for RCS measurements at this range is summarized

in Table B.3. A vertical two-way field plot obtained at 11.3 GHz during the cylinder

measurements is shown in Figure 4.1.1.

Table B.l. THE EVR Frequency Bands.

Band PVequencv Coverage

HF 0.03 -0.05, 0.05-0 .1, 0.1-0.15

VHF 0.150 - 0.224, 0.225 - 0.299

UHF 0.3-- 0.499, 0.5 - 0.665, 0.666 - 0.999

L 1.0--1.49, 1.50- 1.99

S 2.0-- 2.99, 3.0 - 3.99

c 4.0-- 5.99, 6.0 - 8.19

X 8.2-- 10.19, 10.2 - 12.39

Ku 12.4 - 14.99, 15.0 - 17.99

Ka 34- 36

39
Table B.2. Typical EVR Outdoor System Configuration

for Cylincer Measurements.

System configuration

Target support

Frequency (GHz)

Polarization

Range (m)

Transmitter power

Antenna types

Antenna sizes (varies by band, m (ft))

Pulse width (ns)

System video bandwidth (MHz)

PRF (Hz)

coherent monostatic

foam column (421.64 cm high)

8.3, 9.2, 10.1, 10.3, 11.3, 12.3

HH, VV

609.6 (2000 ft)

1 kW

truncated and circular paraboloids

0.91x1.82 , 1.22x2.44, . . . (3x6, 4x8)

30

200

40,000

Table B.3. The EVR RCS Measurement System Parameters.

Control computer

User interface

Frequency coverage

HF frequency capability (MHz)

Normal frequency capability (GHz)

Supported polarizations (normal frequencies)

Antenna polarization

Polarization switching

Frequency table

Coherent integration

Maximum chirp frequencies

Video bandwidth (MHz)

Maximum phase modulation (steps/360°)

Phase encoding schemes

Phase code length

PRF (KHz)

Transmit pulse width (ns)

Transmit pulse increment (ns)

Pulse rise and fall (ns)

Transmit bracket with transmit delay (ns)

Transmit bracket step (ns)

Bracket delay (ns)

Bracket delay step (ns)

Receive channels

Intel Pentium 4 CPU

Windows 2000

30 - 150 (H-pole only)

0.15-18 ,34-36

HH, HV, VH, VV

linear

full matrix pulse-to-pulse

8,192

65,536

2048

1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200

64

bi-phase or poly-phase

1 - 65,536

1,525 - 100,000

5 - 1000

1band dependent

< 2359

131 - 40,960

1Hand V

(continued)

40
Table B.3. The EVR RCS Measurement System Parameters.

(continued)

Number of range gates

Receive aperture (ps)

Range gate delay (ns)

Monostatic range (m (ft))

Number of frequency bands

IF (GHz)

Single pulse dynamic range

I-Q circularity error System stability (dB)

Amplitude linearity

Phase linearity

Phase resolution

Data word length

A/D resolution

Rx/Tx attenuation (dB)

Rx/Tx attenuation step (dB)

RF attenuation (dB)

RF attenuation step (dB)

Pulses in the air

Bias subtraction (dB)

Calibration

Data storage interface

Real-time processing

Post-processing

Output media

Simultaneous real time or post processing plots

4 (per receive channel)

100

31 - 40,960

213, 610, 1220, 1524 (700, 2000, 4000, 5000)

12

2

>60dB

< .2 dB (real-time corrected)

4-/ — 0.1 (after warmup)

0.2 dB per 10 dB

2° per 10 dB

0.01°

16 or 32 bit binary

14 bits - 63 dB

10-63

1single

« -40

pre- and post-calibration

shared memory

RCS, ID transforms

global range, RCS, ISAR, doppler, ASCII

medians, statistics, box scores DVD, CD, hard drive, etc. 8

41

NIST Technical Publications

Periodical

Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology—Reports NIST research and

development in metrology and related fields of physical science, engineering, applied mathematics, statistics, biotechnology, and information technology. Papers cover a broad range of subjects, with major emphasis on measurement methodology and the basic technology underlying standardization. Also included from time to time are survey articles on topics closely related to the Institute's technical and scientific programs. Issued six times a year.

Nonperiodicals

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical literature on various subjects related to the Institute's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and industrial practice (including safety codes) devel- oped in cooperation with interested industries, professional organizations, and regulatory bodies.

Special Publications—Include proceedings of conferences sponsored by NIST, NIST annual reports, and other

special publications appropriate to this grouping such as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties of

materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Developed under a worldwide program

coordinated by NIST under the authority of the National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-396). NOTE: The

Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data (JPCRD) is published bimonthly for NIST by the American

Institute of Physics (AlP). Subscription orders and renewals are available from AIP, P.O. Box 503284, St. Louis,

MO 63150-3284.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical information developed at the Institute on building materials,

components, systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results, test methods, and performance

criteria related to the structural and environmental fiinctions and the durability and safety characteristics of building

elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a subject.

Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject area. Often

serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NIST under the sponsorship of other government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under procedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part

10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations. The standards establish nationally recognized requirements for products, and provide all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of

the characteristics of the products. NIST administers this program in support of the efforts of private-sector

standardizing organizations.

Order thefollowing NISTpublications—FIPS and NISTIRs—from the National Technical Information Service,

Springfield VA 22161.

Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUB)—Publications in this series collectively

constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. The Register serves as the official source of

information in the Federal Government regarding standards issued by NIST pursuant to the Federal Property and

Administrafive Services Act of 1949 as amended. Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1 127), and as implemented by

Executive Order 1 1717 (38 FR 12315, dated May 1 1,1973) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations).

NIST Interagency or Internal Reports (NISTIR)—The series includes interim or final reports on work performed

by NIST for outside sponsors (both government and nongovernment). In general, initial distribution is handled b> the sponsor; public distribution is handled by sales through the National Technical Information Service. Springfield, VA

22161, in hard copy, electronic media, or microfiche form. NlSTlR's may also report results of NIST projects of

transitory or limited interest, including those that will be published subsequently in more comprehensive form.
U.S. Department of Commerce

National Bureau of Standards and Technology

325 Broadway

Boulder, CO 80305-3328

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300