Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ABSTRACT
In this paper, a high-fidelity RF modeling and simulation framework is demonstrated to model an airborne multi-channel
receiver system that is used to estimate the angle of arrival (AoA) of received signals from a stationary emitter. The
framework is based on System Tool Kit (STK), Matlab and SystemVue. The SystemVue-based multi-channel receiver
estimates the AoA of incoming signals using adjacent channel amplitude and phase comparisons, and it estimates the
Doppler frequency shift of the aircraft by processing the transmitted and received signals. The estimated AoA and
Doppler frequency are compared with the ground-truth data provided by STK to validate the efficacy of the modeling
process. Unlike other current RF electronic warfare simulation frameworks, the received signal described herein is
formed using the received power, the propagation delay and the transmitted waveform, and does not require information
such as Doppler frequency shift or radial velocity of the moving platform from the scenario; hence, the simulation is
more computationally efficient. In addition, to further reduce the overall modeling and simulation time, since the high-
fidelity model computation is costly, the high-fidelity electronic system model is evoked only when the received power is
higher than a predetermined threshold.
Keywords: electronic warfare, electronic support measure, high-fidelity RF modeling and simulation, wideband digital
receiver, multi-channel RF receiver, angle-of-arrival estimation, systems-of-systems, antenna array.
1. INTRODUCTION
Modern electronic warfare (EW) RF/microwave systems (e.g. modern phased array radar systems and electronic support
measures (ESM) systems, etc.) use coherent signal processing. Therefore, to develop specifications or evaluate/validate
performance of such systems, an M&S toolset that permits the following is required: 1) signal integrity (i.e., amplitude
and phase of the signal) to be preserved from signal source to final signal processing; 2) electronic system models,
scenario models and RF/microwave wave propagation models with high levels of detail and fidelity; and 3) electronic
system model required fine simulation time steps (up to nanosecond). Multi-system level RF M&S tools that meet these
requirements are referred to here as High-Fidelity RF/microwave M&S (RF-HFM&S). Due to computational cost
considerations, most legacy multi-system level RF M&S tools do not meet the above requirements: e.g., they use only
signal amplitude information, have models with low levels of detail, and run at low update rates (e.g. 50 Hz).
Fortunately, recent developments in modern computer hardware and software technologies have accelerated the
development of RF-HFM&S. Use of high-fidelity and/or hybrid-fidelity threat scenario with single- and multi-platform
and amplitude/phase-based algorithms and simulations have added many capabilities to RF EW M&S beyond those
offered by legacy approaches that only use signal amplitude information [4]. For example, high-fidelity / hybrid-fidelity
M&S is described in [2] and [3]. In [2], EW systems are modeled using Matlab/Simulink, and, in [3], modern radar
systems are modeled using SystemVue and STK. Further, in [5], a Matlab/Simulink based RF receiver front-end
behavioral model is described. Using this receiver model with UAV-based airborne scenarios in STK is described in [6].
The RF-HFM&S tools used in [7] are STK and Matlab/Simulink. In this paper, the selected toolset is STK and Matlab in
conjunction with SystemVue [1]. The toolset is used in the way that received signal is formed using the received power,
the propagation delay and the transmitted waveform. Therefore, the simulation is more computationally efficient when
compared to approaches that require information such as Doppler frequency shift or radial velocity of the moving
platform from the scenario. In addition, in the approach described herein, to further reduce the overall simulation time,
since the SystemVue-based high-fidelity RF system model computation is costly, it is evoked only when the received
power is higher than a predetermined threshold.
chen.wu@drdc-rddc.gc.ca , 1-613-990-0707
Modeling and Simulation for Defense Systems and Applications IX, edited by Eric J. Kelmelis, Proc. of SPIE
Vol. 9095, 909506 2014 SPIE CCC code: 0277-786X/14/$18 doi: 10.1117/12.2051329
V Coripaiyn Camel
Multi Doy
Force on Force......
Operations
Figure 1: In traditional RF system M&S paradigm for EW, different applications have different fidelity/detail of models and scenario
scope (after [2]), CM-countermeasure, TTP-Tactics, Techniques and Procedures, DT&E-Development Test and Evaluation.
The EW systems-of-systems level RF-HFM&S mainly comprises three parts: 1) the detailed models of RF analog/digital
systems/subsystems, 2) close to reality scenarios that allow these systems/subsystems to demonstrate their performance,
and 3) the RF wave propagation environment and the methods used to a) model RF wave propagation, b) platform RF
properties (such as RCS), and c) environmental RF properties (such as radar clutter). Moreover, from a RF M&S
technical perspective, correctly modeling the signal phase in frequency domain and delay in time domain from the signal
source to the final signal processing is crucial. However, currently the modeling of the signal phase is not included in the
conventional RF M&S approaches. The development of advanced RF propagation and asset/environment RF property
models is a challenging R&D topic [6] [11], and will be addressed in the future papers. The following subsections
discuss the tools used in this RF-HFM&S approach.
M
O X 3D Graphics 1 - Earth
'X
J`GroundSearchRadar AirReceiver
Tx antenna pattern
J.JAlrcrditl Terrain
J alRcvrSensorl
p 4:0; Received
J VfeRcvrSensor2
6+Receiver2
130.RcvrSensor3
[J w Receiver3 AircraftbodyX AircraftbodyY
0Ele, Rcvr$ensor4 Aircraft trajectory
O Receiver4
!]gPetersonAFB
O vi ! gRadarFacility
70SearchRadar
O n SearchRadarTransmitter
Peterson AFB
Rx antenna patterns
AircraftbodyZ
Figure 2: Screen copies from the scenario in STK 10.1 (left), the aircraft body coordinates (right-bottom), and the aircraft leaves
airport at 12:30pm (right-top). The aircraft trajectory and scenario location are from [14].
Figure 3 shows a view from the ground-based radar to the aircraft. Some RF system properties of the radar Tx and
airborne Rx used in the scenario are given in the figure. The search radar operates at 2.25 GHz and emits 10 KW peak
power, its antenna vertical and horizontal beamwidths are 5o and 1.1o with 30 dBi maximum gain. The antenna scans at 5
RPM. The Rx radiation pattern is in the shape of a Gaussian-function with 90o 3-dB beamwidth (Figure 6 right-top). The
Tx and Rx antennas have 65% and 50% efficiency, respectively. The Rx receivers also operate at 2.25 GHz. From the Tx
to the four Rxs, the scenario provides 4 sets of data, including the received power and propagation delay as a function of
time. These data are used in the RF Tx-to-Rx propagation channels in the SystemVue and are shown in Figure 4.
3D Graphics 1 - Earth IoIISI I
Type: cregex Receiver Model
Type: Gaussian
Efficiency: 50 :
Type: Coeourt Trsrriler Model
SearchRadarTransmitter Basic Definition o II o IL_ ttJ I mod speal manna IMOaAw lww Adatwed Gans end tosses l
J Basic Model spea pd.frNwn I.ode,taaanl
Type: Complex Transmitter Model
Definition El I^
Type: Cache Aperture Reamed '
Refraction
Modd SPecs Antema Moduiator I Filter I Adtional Gais and Losses I
Description Um Crr+enaom o: Use Bernwtah
J 2D Graphics 5deg
XOrarrbn: 1.8334 m E XDwnBeartmddh -
Contours Frequency: 2.25 GHz
Y Dwrk+oan: 8.33382m Y Drn Beammddh: 1.1 deg
Boresight
Power: 10 k1N
..J 3D Graphics Demgn Frequency: 225G11z
E
ANr :I, Aar
MtinioboGen: 30dB E Carry,ied
OK Cancel APPN
Bludency: a% E
Figure 3: Screen copies from the scenario looking from radar to aircraft, and radar Tx and airborne Rx properties are input to STK.
Figure 4 shows the schematic designs of the radar Tx, the 4-channel airborne Rx, the RF Tx-to-Rx propagation channels,
and the data collections for post processing. The simple pulsed waveform is used as the signal source with pulse
Mag1
Polsec.
PN"+10ps(Pw1
PRI=125ms1PRl)'
PaI satinpa 0.22360679775(PolseHmprsgrl3 Tx
Tx
RF Freg=2 25e.9F )RFFreg)
F Fr.q=100e6H: [Tay-Fran)
G470[T%
n= Gam_tl8)
. . . wavefrc
initl_d.gy=2172296)61806.4
. .
f1
data=(11528004)1490.... '30245,217 F Gan=20.6(F_Gan(1))
.
F NF=4.611F NF(1))
RF_fr.0=225e:9Hi (RP 'Freg)
co
\
StatlSlopOptbR'A4p
123)
\V /
. . . . . . . .
" TXJ1=5
.
- F Freg=200H6Hi(Rx'FFr.q
--.
hIrsL=7.111JizR(i)]
4 t14_Garm11 1(LN Gain(1)1 Pha Phase2
LNANF=1 5.(LNANP(1)I 03 SIanS10pODgorpTima
R.
Ma
: 123
Wavafmn2 Rv2 C3
data=(1152800x2)1-107 893f00985101.21? F Gain=21.2 (F Gain(L)1 StanStOpOptiomAUo
itNial d.1ay=217 2302052754e F FF=4.1 (FrF(2)I
Tx waveform data collection
/ \
RF_Fq=2 25..9Ht (Rf fr.g)
F Fr.q=200.+Rti (Rx ff Fr.p) -
. .Mix0.1.51hi4.(2)j
.
b I
**(123)
123)44-11- Phase3
\ / U2
data (1152800x2) 0204
Ch_ Wavefrc
i852788 21F _Gamn=20.7
initial _delay=2172310491777.6'
,n(3)1
F NF=3.4)FJF 311
Rn3 C4
h+a
$tan$toPOPhacTrre
: 123
12) C1
. . . . . . . .
RF'Ff.q=2.25a.9141?F'Fngl
.
.
.
. FFsiq200NRti(Rz F Freq)
Ma1L=6.9 (Mi,.10)1
Ma93
StadSt0 p0qiaFA,W
USA Gan=12.1(L11A_Gan(3))
StanStoLpORignWlo Lw.JF=1.311.616, NFU
20 .
. .
CA Wareham!
4144=(1152600x2)17104.828599747676.217...
4-ch Rx F Gain=20.9 Rx4
(8Gain(4))
iritql_d.1ay=217.2304924511.
Installed RF_Ftpe2.25..91
F 11F=4.2 (F_NF(4))
(RF_Freql
on aircraft M.z0.=72.I1,640)1
F Fr.q=200.+611i (Rx F_ Fr.gl Received signal data collection Magi
LNA_Gain? 11.71LNA_Gan(4))
1NA NF.x1.6.(ULA_FF(4)( .
for processing StanStopOption.do
Figure 4: A radar transmitter, four RF propagation channels and 4-channle airborne receiver in SystemVue.
Table 2: Typical RF properties of four receiver channels.
Rx LNA noise LNA IF amplifier IF amplifier Mixer insertion
figure (dB) gain (dB) noise figure (dB) Gain (dB) loss (dB)
1 1.5 11.2 4.6 20.6 7.1
2 1.4 11.5 4.1 21.2 7.5
3 1.3 12.1 3.9 20.7 6.9
4 1.6 11.7 4.2 20.9 7.2
Figure 5 shows the antenna received power vs. scenario time. As the radar scans, the received power levels of the
receivers vary following the scan-rate, Tx antenna pattern and the changes in the terrain between Tx and Rx. Since the
main beams of these receiving antennas point at different directions on the aircraft (Figure 6, left), the output power
levels are different. For example, at 498th second, antenna 1 and 2 are facing the radar, and their received power levels
are much higher than that of antenna 3 and 4. By calculating the power difference between the adjacent antennas, and
using the Gain-Difference vs. Azimuth curves in Figure 6, the receiver can estimate the AoA of the radar signal.
m T
u xF
Figure 5: Receiving power at the output ports of the 4 receiving antennas vs. scenario time, and detailed received power at about 498
Sce.
'''"4,-;-"`"'
Antenna Gain (dBi)
blue A t
Ant2 0
red
-5
D
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Angle (degree)
Antenna Gain (dBi)
5
Gain difference
0
-5
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
Az (degree)
Gain Difference (dB)
10
0
Atit3 g
black magenta i a -10
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150
Az (degree) & El = 0 (degree)
Figure 6: Top view of 4 receiving antenna patterns related to the aircraft (left). Gaussian-shaped pattern (right-top), 4 antenna patterns
cover 3600 azimuth angles (right-middle), and adjacent-antenna amplitude-comparison curves (right-bottom) for AoA estimation.
^mxu~
.8P) am.,
1
2
where is the signal phase. Using the 1, 2, 3 4 and _ produced by the model (shown in
Figure 4), the received and transmitted signal instantaneous frequencies can be calculated. The difference between these
instantaneous frequencies is the estimated Doppler shift. Figure 7 (right) shows the estimated Doppler shift (red)
comparing with aircraft Doppler frequency shift data provided by STK Data Provider. They have good agreement.
200
600
150
400
100
200
50
Doppler shift (Hz)
AoA (degree)
0 0
-50
-200
-100
-400
-150
-200 -600
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Scenario epoch time (sec) Scenario epoch time (sec)
Figure 7: The estimated AoA results with its STK data (left), the SystemVue receiver calculated moving aircraft Doppler shift and
STK Doppler shift data (right), the transmitted signal has a pulsed waveform. Red: SystemVue receiver estimated result, Blue: STK
data.
To the best of authors knowledge, the current RF M&S tools use the Doppler frequency shift or moving platform radial
velocity obtained from the scenario as a part of the input data to a receiver model to derive the received signal. In this
work, the Doppler frequency shift is obtained from the time-domain received RF signal without using the ground truth
Doppler frequency shift provided by the STK scenarios.
Tx LO
Frequency=2.15e49Hz [Tx lo_Freql Lo_40001
Power=18dBrn
S1
SampleRater10.48MHz [BB SamplingRate)
23
5 RADAR
10 Tx w LO 23
Zero. dBm_Ck_sig1 Tx
ain=0:316227766017 Vero_dBmj RF_Freq=2.25e+9HgRF2 req]
IF Freq.100L.13Hz1Tx Reg]
-Tx GairP70 (TX_Galn 'dB) " '
Pidietifidthi1Opi [PIN] TX_NF.S
RADAR PRI=1.26ms [PRI]
LFM Bandwidthrt5.1MHz [Chirp_BW1
1313_,SamplingRate10.48MHz
Figure 8: Radar is at a new place (top). Its transmitter emits a LFM signal with 5.1 MHz bandwidth (bottom), and other parameters are
the same as those given in Figure 3.
200 600
150
400
100
200
50
Doppler shift (Hz)
AoA (degree)
0 0
-50
-200
-100
-400
-150
-200 -600
0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Scenario epoch time (sec) Scenario epoch time (sec)
Figure 9: The estimated AoA results with its STK data (left), the SystemVue receiver calculated moving aircraft Doppler shift and
STK Doppler shift data (right), the transmitted signal has a linear frequency modulated waveform with bandwidth 5.1 MHz. Red:
SystemVue receiver estimated result, Blue: STK data.
Using adjacent-channel phase comparison method, the measured AoA result (red dots in Figure 11 left) is compared with
the data from STK scenario. The overall RMS estimation accuracy is about 0.260. This result agrees with the general
knowledge that the phase comparison method produces better AoA estimation results than that of the amplitude
comparison method. The Doppler frequency shift results are also shown in Figure 11 (right), which are in agreement
with the ground truth data.
Figure 10: The third scenario has 4-element linear array carried by an aircraft. The element spacing of the array is 66 mm. The ground
emitter parameters are the same as those in the first scenario, except the peak power is 0.1 KW.
130 1000
800
120
600
110
400
Doppler shift (Hz)
100 200
AoA (degree)
90 0
-200
80
-400
70
-600
60
-800
50 -1000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Scenario epoch time (sec) Scenario epoch time (sec)
Figure 11: The phase-comparison method estimated AoA result and STK data (left), the SystemVue receiver calculated moving
aircraft Doppler shift and STK Doppler shift data (right). Red: SystemVue receiver estimated result, Blue: STK data.
5. CONCLUSIONS
An RF-HFM&S approach is discussed in this paper. The approach applies modern modeling and simulation software
tools including STK, Matlab and SystemVue. Using three scenarios, the paper demonstrates how to use these software
tools for multi-system level RF-HFM&S. By correctly modeling the signal time delay and/or phase change from a
transmitter, via RF propagation environment, to a receiver, the received signal frequency can be modeled without using
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like thank Mr. Girish Rao for first introducing the SystemVue to this work and demonstrating his
M&S work.
REFERENCES