Signal Processing Radar

reg.
number : 2008telb0075
Thesis
presented at the
Military University of Technology in Warsaw
with the authorisation of the University of Rennes 1
to obtain the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in association with Telecom

Bretagne and the Military University of Technology
Domain : Signal Processing and Telecommunications

Mention : Traitement du Signal et Télécommunication
by
Tomasz Górski
Universities : Telecom Bretagne and the Military University of Technology in Warsaw
Space-Time Adaptive Signal Processing for Sea

Surveillance Radars
Defence December 9, 2008 before the examination board :
Reporters : Marc Acheroy, Professor at Royal Military Academy in Brussels

Richard Klemm, Doctor at FGAN
Examiners : Jean Marc Le-Caillec, Professor at Telecom Bretagne

Adam Kawalec, Professor at the Military University of Technology in Warsaw
Laurent Ferro-Famil, Doctor with accreditation to supervise reasearch
at the University of Rennes 1
Ali Khenchaf, Professor at ENSIETA
Contents
1 Introduction. 1
2 Radar Basics, Space-Time Adaptive Processing and Target Detection. 3

2.1 Radar principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 Overview of STAP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.1 Problem Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.2 Radar System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.3 Airborne Clutter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.4 Adaptive MTI. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.2.5 STAP Processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.6 Assumptions and Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3 Detection Principles: Neyman-Pearson Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.3.1 Notation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3.2 Neyman-Pearson Lemma. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3.3 Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.3.4 Alternative Hypothesis of the Form θ > θH0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.3.5 Alternative Hypothesis of the Form θ 6= θH0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.4 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.4.1 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals in Narrowband Noise. . . . . 22
2.4.2 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals with Random Phase Angles. 23
2.5 Spherically Invariant Random Process (SIRP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.6 Likelihood Ratio Test and Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test applied to the
Spherically Invariant Random Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.6.1 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals - Likelihood Ratio Test. . . . 25
2.6.2 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals with Random Phase Angles
and Random Amplitude - GLRT Detector. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.7 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
3 Sea Clutter. 31
CONTENTS ii
3.1 Sea clutter characterization in X band. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.2 Sea clutter characterization in HF band. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.3 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
4 Two Dirac delta detector. 50

4.1 Resolving GLRT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
4.2 Two Dirac Deltas approximation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.2.1 First approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.2.2 Refined approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
4.3 Simulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.3.1 Simulation parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
4.3.2 Target Simulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.3.3 Additive Noise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
4.4 Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.4.1 Classical STAP detection performance evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . 65
4.4.2 Numerical simplifications for TDD STAP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
4.4.3 Comparison of classical STAP and TDD STAP for fixed ∆ parameter. 70
4.4.4 Results for TDD STAP detector with automatic ∆ finding. . . . . . . 73
4.5 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
5 HF radar signals experiments and STAP technique modifications. 76

5.1 WERA radar system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
5.2 Implementation of Adaptive MTI and STAP - covariance matrix estimation
problem. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
5.2.1 Adaptive MTI implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
5.2.2 STAP implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.3 Comparisons between the results of AMTI and STAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.3.1 Data file and target description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.3.2 Detection of the tug ship from Garchine radar site. . . . . . . . . . . . 89
5.3.3 Detection of the tug ship from Brezzelec radar site. . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.3.4 Detection of the fishery ship from Garchine radar site. . . . . . . . . . 92
5.3.5 Detection of the fishery ship from Brezzelec radar site. . . . . . . . . . 97
5.4 Thresholding and detections presentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.5 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
6 Conclusions and perspectives 104
A Gaussian complex process. 106

CONTENTS iii
B Data generation. 108
C Space Time Adaptive Processing based on Frequency Modulated Contin-

uous Wave system. 110
C.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
C.2 Preliminaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
C.3 Antenna array with FMCW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
C.4 STAP system using FMCW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
C.5 FMCW HF system - practical example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
C.6 FMCW X-band system - practical example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
C.7 FMCW L-band system - practical example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
D List of symbols and abbreviations. 125
Bibliography 127
1
CHAPTER
Introduction.
Present radar systems for sea surveillance have several limitations. One group of limitations
is related to strong clutter from sea waves (especially during heavy seas periods). Another
group is related to range limitations of present microwave systems. These are big obstacles
hindering to provide reliable surveillance data that cover Exclusive Economic Zone (200
nautical miles)1 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Therefore a big challenge is to find new
techniques for this application. This work covers signal processing for this purpose. Space-
Time Adaptive Processing (STAP) technique has a relatively long history. The theory of
STAP was first published by Lawrence E. Brennan and Irving S. Reed in 1970’s [6], whereas
complete monographies on this subject were published by Richard Klemm in 2002 and 2004
[37, 38]. It is also worth to mention here contribution of the paper written by E. J. Kelly [36].
Nevertheless applications are mainly related to target detection in the presence of clutter
that has Gaussian statistical properties. In this work it is proposed to apply this technique
to target detection under non-Gaussian conditions.
The thesis of this work can be formulated as follows: STAP can be an effective tech-
nique for the Sea Surveillance Radars. Surveillance can be understood as clutter (and
interferences) suppression, target matching and threshold decision. To this end there are three
problems that can be identified with regards to the sea clutter problem. These problems are:
1. Clutter non-stationarity in space and time.
2. Clutter non-Gaussianity.
3. Clutter with spread Doppler spectrum.
The purpose of this work is to evaluate different algorithms, to find possible problems with
implementing them and to try to find solutions to these problems. As a result this work serves
as a complete guide how to deal with sea clutter by modifying STAP technique.
In the first chapter, reader can find elementary radar concepts as well as an introduction
to Space-Time Adaptive Processing. First section is devoted to basic radar concepts. Next
section is an introduction to Adaptive MTI (AMTI) and STAP. It will be shown how STAP
was introduced for airborne radar, and what was rationale standing behind this. Generally
we can say, that the origin of STAP was the observation, that clutter spectrum depends on
the look angle of radar system. Assumptions and limitations of STAP will be shown in the
same chapter. In the next sections reader can find some elements of detection theory and
Neyman-Pearson Lemma and Test. This will build a base to derive more general detectors
than STAP in chapter 4. In the same chapter theory of Spherically Invariant Random Process
1
EEZ zone was defined in 1982 by United Nations Convention in Montego Bay.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION. 2
(SIRP) is introduced. This theory is very useful when dealing with non-Gaussian clutter. It
will be shown in the next chapter, that sea clutter very often has non-Gaussian properties
and in this case we can employ theory of SIRP. Last section will be devoted to derivation of
Neymann-Pearson tests in the case of SIRP. It will be shown, that classical STAP algorithm
can be derived from this more general form.
The second chapter is devoted entirely to sea clutter characterization. Two radar bands
will be considered: X-band and HF-band. In the first section, X-band clutter Doppler-
spectrum and its properties will be presented. It will be shown, that clutter Doppler shift
and statistics are related to geometry of the scene as well as many ocean parameters [9]. This
property is exploited in STAP algorithm, therefore it is worth considering STAP technique
to deal with this kind of clutter. Unfortunately X-band sea clutter (especially for low graz-
ing angles) has non-Gaussian properties [8], whereas STAP was derived under assumption
of Gaussianity. Therefore it is possible to improve classical STAP algorithm to deal with
sea clutter. This problem will be treated in chapter 4. For HF-band, sea clutter properties
are different. The main contribution to the clutter is Bragg scattering. Its Doppler spec-
trum remains the same across different look angles. Moreover, for HF-band it is very likely
to have strong radio interferences. Author’s own calculations illustrating Bragg clutter and
interferences will be presented. Results were obtained using real data from WERA radar sys-
tem. Again we can see, that clutter and interferences have two-dimensional, space and time
structure, and therefore it is reasonably to use STAP algorithm.
Chapter 4 addresses the problem of the derivation of detectors under non-Gaussianity
that was raised in chapter 3. This is done in the framework of Spherically Invariant Ran-
dom Process. A new detector will be presented. It can deal with non-Gaussian clutter and
noise. To evaluate performances of classical and new STAP detector in non-Gaussian clutter,
I performed some simulations. Receiver Operation Curves (ROC) are presented based on
simulations made by the author. A discussion of the performances of usual STAP and the
proposed detector under different kind of clutter (Gaussian, non-Gaussian) is included. I will
show, that the new developed detector can give some improvement in comparison to classical
STAP algorithm in the presence of non-Gaussian clutter.
In chapter 5 experiments from High Frequency (HF) radar system will be presented. HF
radar systems, which operate in frequency range between 3 and 30 MHz, have a potential to
detect targets which are located beyond optical horizon on the sea surface (Over The Horizon
visibility - OTH). In this context new problems have to be faced. An exhaustive review of
these problems can be found in [3]. In this chapter two techniques will be considered. First one
is AMTI, and the second is STAP. Because of practical problems, classical algorithms must
be adapted, which will be also shown in this chapter. Results were obtained using real data,
from the oceanographic system WERA. This chapter is concentrated on signal processing
part and to much less extent on detection problems.
Additional problems are addressed in Appendices. Among them, the most important is
the problem of application of STAP algorithm to Continuous Wave (CW) systems. This
problem is treated in Appendix C.3.
This work can be viewed as an attempt to find how to apply STAP technique to the
problem of detecting targets on the sea surface.
This PhD thesis is a result of cooperation between Military University of Technology in
Warsaw (Poland) and Telecom-Bretagne in Brest (France).
2
CHAPTER
Radar Basics,
Space-Time Adaptive
Processing and Target
Detection.
Present radar systems operate in very difficult environment, where target echo must compete
against ground or sea clutter, noise, interferences and jamming. Therefore, apart from solv-
ing strictly technical problems such as increasing peak power, improving range resolution,
there is a need of effective signal processing techniques to detect targets while maintaining
reasonably low level of false alarms. In the era of non-coherent radars, the solution was to
reduce resolution cell to limit the clutter power. After deployment of pulse-coherent radars
it became possible to apply more advanced techniques based on Doppler effect. This is how
Moving Target Indication (MTI) and pulsed-Doppler radars were invented. We can gener-
ally say that these techniques are based on Fourier analysis and sometimes adaptive filtering
(Adaptive MTI) and proved to be very effective in suppressing clutter. Very exhaustive de-
scription of such systems can be found in [53]. However, these techniques are based only on
time-domain. The other group of signal processing techniques is based on adaptive antennas.
This group is operating in space domain and employ array antennas to suppress directional
interference and other directional distortions. More information on this topic can be found
in [44]. The problem however persisted, how to combine these two techniques - one operating
in time domain and the other in space domain. The solution was introduction of Space-Time
Adaptive Processing (STAP), that will be described in this chapter. STAP is a technique that
performs adaptation in two domains at the same time (whereas Adaptive MTI works only in
time domain). This raises possibilities of suppressing distortions that have two-dimensional
structure.
In section 2.1 elementary radar concepts will be presented. In section 2.2 Adaptive MTI
(AMTI) and classical STAP algorithm will be introduced. It will be shown how STAP was
introduced for airborne radar, and what was rationale standing behind this. Assumptions
and limitations will be shown in the same section. Section 2.3 will be devoted to detection
theory and to the Neyman-Pearson Lemma and Test. This will build a base to derive more
general detectors than STAP. Some examples of Neyman-Pearson tests will be presented in
section 2.4. Section 2.5 will present theory of Spherically Invariant Random Process (SIRP).
This theory is very useful when dealing with non-Gaussian clutter. It will be shown later,
that sea clutter very often has non-Gaussian properties and in this case we can employ
theory of SIRP. Section 2.6 will be devoted to derivation of Neymann-Pearson tests in the
case of SIRP. It will be shown, that classical STAP algorithm can be derived from this
CHAPTER 2. RADAR BASICS, SPACE-TIME ADAPTIVE PROCESSING AND
TARGET DETECTION. 4
Figure 2.1 — Radar principle - electromagnetic wave reflection from a target.
more general form.
2.1 Radar principles.

Radar is a sensor that uses electromagnetic waves to obtain information about the range,
direction or speed of moving or fixed objects. The simplest radar system transmits modulated
pulses of electromagnetic wave. Electromagnetic wave is then partially reflected by an object
and returns toward radar receiver as a target echo (see Fig. 2.1). Radar can measure the
time between transmition of the pulse and reception of the echo, and calculate distance to
the target using formula:
ct
R= (2.1)
2
where R is a measured distance to the target, c is a speed of light and t is elapsed time
between transmission and reception of the echo. Fig. 2.2 presents basic time relations that
are important in radar systems. Pulse Repetition Interval (PRI) is related to the fact that
usually radars transmit signals that are periodical. PRI is a time between two successive
pulses transmitted by the radar. τ denotes pulse duration. t is the time that is passed between
transmission of the pulse and reception of the target echo. Usually, information about distance
to the target is presented in the discreet form, therefore instead of the range it is better to use
the term range gate or range cell - Fig. 2.3. This means nothing more but the discretization of
the range value. This principle allows to obtain information about the distance and direction
TARGET DETECTION. 5
Figure 2.2 — Basic time relations.
Figure 2.3 — Range gates.
to the target. To be able to extract velocity information about the target it is necessary
to introduce pulse-coherent radar. This means the use of quadrature receiver which extracts
amplitude together with phase information on pulse to pulse basis. Structure of such a receiver
is presented in Fig. 2.4. After this process, for each range gate we have a series of complex
samples. Samples are obtained from successive pulses of the radar. If the target is not moving,
relative to the radar, phase of this series of samples is constant (precisely angles of complex
samples). If the target is moving between pulses, then the angles of complex samples are
changing from pulse to pulse. This is the way to extract Doppler, and therefore velocity
information. In practice, to extract Doppler information, a finite sequence of pulses is used.
Therefore it is worth to remind some basic relations:
2Vr
fD = (2.2)
λ
Figure 2.4 — Quadrature Receiver [41]. fc denotes radar carrier frequency, fs denotes sam-
pling frequency.
TARGET DETECTION. 6
Figure 2.5 — Environmental diagram [53].
where fD denotes Doppler frequency of the target, λ is a radar pulse wavelength and Vr is a
target radial velocity relative to the radar. Doppler resolution is related to the dwelling time,
which in practice means the time of coherent processing:
1
Dr = (2.3)
TDWELL
where Dr denotes Doppler resolution expressed in Hz. This can be expressed in terms of
number of pulses - n. Let PRF=1/PRI (Pulse Repetition Frequency). Then:
PRF
Dr = (2.4)
n
It can be seen, that to improve Doppler resolution it is necessary to increase dwelling time
which in practice means to use more pulses in processing. The PRI multiplied by the number
of processed pulses is often called Coherent Processing Interval (CPI) and is exactly the same
as dwelling time. The other important relation is an unambiguous velocity condition:
PRF > 2fD (2.5)
This condition is a radar equivalent of Nyquist-Shannon-Kotelnikov theorem. It means, that

to be able to unambiguously determine the target velocity it is necessary to have PRF greater
than twice the Doppler shift of this target. In practice, however, very often this condition isn’t
fulfilled and we have situation, when velocity is ambigiuous. Operator of the radar, in such
a case, must be aware that velocity of the target can be different than the one indicated by
the system. Unfortunately in real scenarios, radar receives echoes not only from targets, but
also other signals. This can include interferences from other sources (eg. jamming), as well
as reflection from objects that are not interesting from the point of view of radar operator.
All of this signals are called clutter. Sometimes the term clutter is used in a narrower sense
when it means only passive distortions (excluding interferences). In Fig. 2.5 it is shown an
environmental diagram that radar engineer can face. It can be seen, that apart from targets,
many other sources of signal are present. These distortions can be suppressed by signal
processing techniques such as MTI, Adaptive Beamforming (AB) or STAP.
MTI technique is based on Doppler principle. For example, if only ground clutter is present
for not moving radar system, then clutter has approximately zero Doppler shift. Therefore
TARGET DETECTION. 7
Figure 2.6 — Principle of MTI technique [53].
Figure 2.7 — Concept of steering antenna null toward interference [33].
to reject clutter it is necessary to implement Doppler filter having stopband around zero
Doppler frequency (see Fig. 2.6).
Situation is more complicated when the clutter is moving in relation to the radar. Then
adaptive techniques can be useful in this case. Adaptivity means, that filters adapt themselves
to the clutter properties in Doppler domain.
Another group of techniques are phased or adaptive arrays. The concept of adaptive
array is based on the idea of changing antenna pattern in order to steer antenna null toward
interference source as presented in Fig. 2.7.
This can be realized using two-antennas and introducing signal phase shift between an-
tennas (Fig. 2.8).
Modification of this technique is an application of quadrature receivers (the same as for
MTI technique). In this case each antenna has its own quadrature receiver. Then null steering
is performed by applying appropriate complex weight to each of the antennas (see Fig. 2.9).
Finally when dealing with multiple interference sources, it is necessary to apply multiple
nulls. This can be done using more antennas in array antenna (Fig. 2.10).
Example of a complete system is presented in Fig. 2.11.
For simplicity reasons quadrature receivers are not presented in the picture.
Next step in radar technology evolution was to introduce combination of a MTI and
adaptive arrays in a single technique. This concept is named Space-Time Adaptive Processing
and is presented in the next section.
TARGET DETECTION. 8
Figure 2.8 — Null steering using phase shifters [33]. d denotes distance between antennas.
Figure 2.9 — Two element adaptive antenna [33].

TARGET DETECTION. 9
Figure 2.10 — Four antennas array [33].
Figure 2.11 — Complete adaptive array system [44].

TARGET DETECTION. 10
Figure 2.12 — Airborne clutter [53].
2.2 Overview of STAP.
STAP is a modern signal processing technique, that can improve target detectability in the
presence of a strong clutter. In this section only short review on this topic is presented, more
exhaustive analysis of STAP can be found in a book written by Richard Klemm [37].
2.2.1 Problem Statement.
If we consider Moving Target Indication for airborne radar, then we face the problem that
echo coming from non-moving ground objects (ground clutter) possess non-zero Doppler
bandwidth [53] (Fig. 2.12). This is a result of relative velocity between antenna platform
(aircraft) and ground area illuminated by the radar system. As a consequence, target echo
can fall within the clutter bandwidth and may be hidden under the clutter (Fig. 2.12 shows
simpler case, where target echo is outside the clutter band). In this case, clutter rejection will
also reject target echo. STAP objective is to filter-out ground clutter, while preserving echo
coming from moving target.
2.2.2 Radar System.
In order to achieve its objective, STAP employs antenna array, which allows angle of arrival
filtering. In Fig. 2.13 we can see the geometry of airborne antenna arrays. Axis Vp denotes
flight direction. There are possible two basic configurations: side-looking and forward-looking.
For side-looking configuration, receiving elements are placed along the flight axis. For forward-
looking configuration, receiving elements are placed along an axis perpendicular to the flight
axis, but parallel to the ground plane. Side-looking configuration is simpler to analyze, there-
fore we assume this configuration only. Also for simplicity reasons, we assume that receiving
elements are equally-spaced, with element spacing equal to λ/2 (λ denotes wavelength). An-
tenna array allows cone-angle (α in Fig. 2.13) filtering. Echo arriving from point P (Fig.
2.13) on the ground is sampled in space by array elements. Wave-front coming from point P
is arriving at antenna receiving elements at different moments in time. In other words: there
is a phase difference among array channels. This phase difference is related to cone angle
α. For other configurations (with slant angle), analysis is more complicated, but qualitative
results are similar.
Figure 2.13 — Geometry of airborne antenna arrays [37].
Figure 2.14 — Moving radar system [58].
2.2.3 Airborne Clutter.
If we consider moving radar system (Fig. 2.14), it can be shown that Doppler shift of echo
coming from non-moving environment depends on cone angle [37]. Each point in space, seen
by the radar under angle α is approaching radar at the same speed. More precisely, this speed
is proportional to the radar platform velocity and to the cosinus of the angle α. Therefore,
all such points have the same Doppler shift (proportional to cos α). The cone is, therefore,
surface of constant Doppler shift. But usually, airborne radar experiences reflections not from
the whole space but from the ground plane only (excluding potential target). Therefore, to
obtain the set of points with the same Doppler shift we should intersect cone surface with
the ground plane as in Fig. 2.14. Result of intersection of a cone with a plane is a hyperbola.
Hyperbola is therefore a set of all points with the same Doppler shift. Lines on the ground of
constant Doppler shift are named isodops. In our case a single hyperbola is exactly an isodop.
Figure 2.15 — Isodops [37].
Figure 2.16 — Range sphere [58].
Each Doppler shift is related to a single isodop (hyperbola). Bunch of isodops is shown in
Fig. 2.15. In the same figure it can be seen that zero-Doppler isodop (fr = 0) is a straight
line perpendicular to the flight path. On the right side of zero-Doppler isodop, are placed
positive-Doppler isodops. The last of them is a maximum-Doppler isodop (fr = 1) which is in
fact a half of a straight line. On the left side are placed negative-Doppler isodops.
We are usually interested in target detection, together with the information about the
range to the target. Isorange line is a line of constant range to the radar. It is a circle on
the ground, which is an intersection of a ground plane and a sphere with the radius which
corresponds to our range of interest(Fig. 2.16 and 2.17).
Taking into account both isodops and isorange lines, we see that for the specific range
and for the specific Doppler shift, we receive echo from specific areas on the ground. This can
Figure 2.17 — Isorange circles and isodops [53].
Figure 2.18 — Space-time structure of clutter [37].
be paraphrased: clutter from the specific range and of the specific Doppler shift is arriving
from specific angles only. This relation is exploited in STAP.
In Fig. 2.18 we can see space-time clutter structure in Doppler frequency-cosinus of cone
angle (α) coordinate system. Clutter occupies only part of the coordinate plane. Moreover
for the simple case of a side-looking antenna configuration, clutter lays on a straight line (in
Fig. 2.18) as a result of the fact, that Doppler shift is proportional to the cos α, as was shown
before. For other antenna configurations, clutter has a different pattern, but always occupies
only small part of that plane.
In the picture (Fig. 2.18) two possible targets are depicted. One so-called slow target and
the other so-called fast target. Slow target (dashed line) is a target whose radial speed Vr to
the radar is small in comparison with the speed of the radar platform relative to the ground
Vp . Movement of the radar platform generates clutter whose Doppler spectrum extends from
Figure 2.19 — Data cube [43].
−2Vp /λ to +2Vp /λ, where λ is a radar working wavelength (see Fig. 2.12). As a result, clutter
Doppler spectrum generated by the movement of the platform can be broader than Doppler
shift of the target. Therefore echo from this target is likely to be suppressed by the temporal
MTI filter (see Fig. 2.6). On the other hand, fast target is a target whose radial speed to the
radar platform is high in comparison to the radar platform speed. In this case there is only
low risk, that echo from this target will be suppressed. Since we are interested in detecting
both slow and fast targets, it can be seen, that separate Doppler (inverse temporal clutter
filter in Fig. 2.18) or separate angle filtering (inverse spatial clutter filter in Fig. 2.18) may
filter-out target signal together with the clutter. Some of the targets will not be detected.
Two-dimensional filtering (space-time clutter filter in Fig. 2.18) allows to filter out clutter
echo and preserve target echo.
2.2.4 Adaptive MTI.
Before introducing STAP algorithm it is worth to recall Adaptive MTI (AMTI). This algo-
rithm was used for example in [25].
AMTI (purely temporal adaptive filtering) utilizes echoes from coherent pulse trains re-
ceived by an antenna array. Pulse trains allows temporal (Doppler) filtering, whereas different
channels of antenna array allow spatial (angle) filtering.
AMTI is operating on so-called data cube (Fig. 2.19). Data cube consists of complex
samples taken from N pulses by M antenna elements for range cells from 1 to L. We are
assuming, that pulse train consists of N coherent pulses. Echoes are coherently sampled by
a quadrature receiver as described in section 2.1.
The first step of processing is beamforming (Fig. 2.20).
After this step data are available as a cube with beams instead of antennas (Fig. 2.20
and 2.21). The rest of the processing is performed independently for each beam. For each
range-beam cell, adaptive filter is calculated using auxiliary range cells of the same beam.
Formula for the test statistic is given by [53]:
|vH R̂−1
k xk |
2
η= (2.6)
vH R̂−1
k v
Figure 2.20 — Beamforming.
Figure 2.21 — Data snapshot.
where v is a steering vector for tested velocity, xk is a data vector (N pulses) from the range
cell and the beam of interest, and R̂−1k is an inverse of the sample covariance matrix. This test
statistics has a property of Constant False Alarm Ratio (CFAR), as long as clutter follows
Gaussian distribution [53]. Sample covariance matrix is calculated using auxiliary snapshots
of the same beam. Usually auxiliary snapshots are taken from the same beam but from
different range cells. It is worth to mention here, that above test statistics is of the same form
as for STAP (which will be shown in the next section). The difference is the interpretation
of vectors and matrices present in the equation (2.6). For AMTI, vectors and matrices are
related to a single beam and multiple pulses, whereas for STAP it will be vectors related to
two-dimensional, space and time structure. Underlying assumption of both AMTI and STAP
is that clutter follows Gaussian process.
After such a processing, results available in the form of the test statistics cube (range ×
velocity × angle).
2.2.5 STAP Processing.
To make profit of angle dependency of Doppler shift, STAP is operating on the raw data
cube (Fig. 2.19). STAP is processing one slice of the data cube, for the range cell of interest:
 
[xk ]1,1 [xk ]1,2 . . . [xk ]1,N
 [xk ] [xk ]2,2 . . . [xk ]2,N 
 2,1 
Xk =  . .. . ..  (2.7)
 .. . . . . 
[xk ]M,1 [xk ]M,2 . . . [xk ]M,N
where k denotes range cell, M is the number of antennas, N is the number of pulses processed,
and in expression [xk ]a,b , a denotes antenna and b denotes pulse. Then Xk is the backscatter
signal from one range cell (k) but for all pulses and antennas. For further processing we
need to vectorize slice (2.7) by stacking each succeeding column one beneath the other. This
operation yields the space-time snapshot for the k -th range:
h i
xT
k = [xk ]1,1 , [xk ]2,1 . . . [x k ]M,1 , [xk ]1,2 , [xk ]2,2 . . . [x k ]M,2 , [xk ]1,3 , [x k ]2,3 . . . . . . [xk ]M,N (2.8)
T denotes transposition.
Let us consider a single reflecting point. Assuming that first antenna element is a reference
point, received space-time snapshot should be of the form [37]:
xk = a · ss−t (fsp , fd ) (2.9)
where a denotes a random complex amplitude and ss−t (fsp , fd ) is the following steering vector:
 
1 · 1
 exp(j2π · fsp ) · 1 
 
 exp(j2π · 2fsp ) · 1 
 
 exp(j2π · 3fsp ) · 1 
 
 .. 
 . 
 
 exp(j2π · (M − 1)fsp ) · 1 
 
 1 · exp(j2π · fd ) 
 
 exp(j2π · fsp ) · exp(j2π · fd ) 

ss−t (fsp , fd ) =   (2.10)
.. 
 . 
 
 exp(j2π · (M − 1)fsp ) · exp(j2π · fd ) 
 
 1 · exp(j2π · 2f ) 
 d 
 exp(j2π · fsp ) · exp(2π · 2fd ) 
 
 .. 
 . 
 
 .. 
 . 
exp(j2π · (M − 1)fsp ) · exp(j2π · (N − 1)fd )
where fsp = λd cos(α), fd = 2·ν λ T , α denotes the cone angle (Fig. 2.13), vr - radial velocity
r
between reflecting point and antenna, λ - wavelength and T is a PRI. The steering vector
can be written as ss−t (fsp , fd ) = ssp (fsp ) ⊗ st (fd ), where ssp (fsp ) is a vector performing space
processing and st (fd ) is the Doppler processing vector. When multiplying a vector by the
above steering vector, we perform in fact a 2-D Fourier Transform in the space and the time
domain.
Registered space-time snapshot is a result of coherent summation of waves from many

sources:
xk = sk + ck + jk + nk (2.11)
sk denotes a target reflection, ck stands for clutter return, jk is jammer signal and nk repre-
sents uncorrelated noise. Of course target and jammer signals are not always present.
Classical STAP processor is a linear filter [36] [51] of the form [37]:
yk = wkH · xk (2.12)
where yk is a resulting scalar, wk - weight vector, and superscript H denotes conjugate

transpose. Formula for the optimum weight vector1 is [37]:
wk = β · R−1
k · ss−t (fsp , fd ) (2.13)
β denotes scalar, R−1 H

k is an inverse of covariance matrix of xk : Rk = E{xk xk } assuming no
target signal present in the data. ss−t (fsp , fd ) is a steering vector (2.10) for the possible target
we want to detect. Above formula can be derived from Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test,
which will be shown in the section 2.6. In practice both R−1 k and ss−t (fsp , fd ) are unknown.
Instead of R−1k , an inverse of the sample covariance matrix R̂−1
k is often used.
ss−t (fsp , fd ) is steering vector for, only one, possible target. To construct this vector it
is necessary to possess perfect knowledge about the target velocity and angle α relative to
the antenna (see Fig. 2.13). In practice neither velocity nor angle is known. Instead, we can
test for targets at a series of discrete points covering angle-velocity space (test grid). Test
grid must be dense enough, to sufficiently precisely approximate velocity and angle of any
possible target. Then each point from velocity-angle grid is transformed into a surrogate
steering vector vs−t , that will be used in (2.13) as a replacement of ss−t (fsp , fd ). Mismatch
between real ss−t (fsp , fd ) and surrogate vs−t leads to some performance loss of detector.
For MTI purpose, decision function has to discriminate between two hypotheses:
H0 : xk = ck + jk + nk
H1 : xk = sk + ck + jk + nk
where H0 denotes null hypothesis that there is no target within the range cell of interest, H1
denotes an alternative hypothesis that target is present.
Using optimum weight vector and taking [43]:
1
β=q ,
H R̂−1 v
vs−t k s−t
gives test statistics [43]:

H R̂−1 x |2
|vs−t k k
η= H R̂−1 v
(2.14)
vs−t k s−t
1
This is true under different optimization criteria - Maximum Likelihood estimation(ML), Signal to
Noise(plus Interference) Ratio maximization(SNR), Minimum Noise Variance(MV) estimation and Least Mean
Square Error(LMSE) estimation, but only under assumption of proper complex Gaussian process (multivari-
ate complex Gaussian process with vanishing pseudo-covariance [46]) of the clutter. This assumption will be
examined more deeply in subsequent parts of this work.
This test statistics has a Constant False Alarm Ratio (CFAR) property [51] (from [43]). As
a result, a two-dimensional real test statistics map is obtained as an output of the STAP
filter (for any range cell of interest). One dimension of this map is an angle, and the other
is a velocity of a potential target. This map represents a grid of surrogates vs−t for a true
steering ss−t , which is unknown.
Decision function is constructed by comparing η to a fixed threshold γ. If η < γ then the
verdict is: target is absent. If η > γ the verdict is: target is present.
2.2.6 Assumptions and Limitations.
Gaussian Assumption.
STAP is a special case of optimum processing in the presence of Gaussian distortions. Formu-
lation for optimum processing can be found, among others, in [53] and [44]. STAP underlying
assumption is: clutter can be modeled by a proper complex Gaussian (band-pass) process
[37] which is explained underneath. For the simple one-dimensional case, proper Gaussian
process can be represented as [44] [53]:
ct = xt cos(ωc t) − yt sin(ωc t) (2.15)
where xt , and yt , are independently, identically distributed from normal distribution of a zero
mean value and the same variance. Then:
ct = vt cos(ωc t + θt ), (2.16)
θt is uniformly distributed, and voltage envelope vt is Rayleigh distributed. We can now treat
xt and yt as real and imaginary parts of complex process.
For multidimensional case (e.g. multiple M sensors and coherent N pulses), xt and yt
become vectors xt and yt . xt is an In-phase vector:
h i
xTt = [xt ]1 , [xt ]2 , [xt ]3 . . . [xt ]M ·N
and yt is an Quadrature vector:

h i
ytT = [yt ]1 , [yt ]2 , [yt ]3 . . . [yt ]M ·N
Similarly to one-dimensional case, we assume that:
E{xt } = 0, E{yt } = 0
This implies that the process is entirely characterized by its covariance matrix:
nh x i o
E [xT yT ] = M
y
For narrowband processes, covariance matrix can be presented in the specific form (see
Appendix A) [48] [56] [44] [53]:
nh x i o 1 · V −W ¸
T T
E [x y ] =
y 2 W V
Therefore it is possible to represent this process in complex notation. If we assume complex

vector:
 
[xt ]1 + j[yt ]1
 [xt ] + j[yt ] 
 2 2 
zt =  . 
 .. 
[xt ]M ·N + j[yt ]M ·N
then the covariance matrix is:

E{zzH } = V + jW
Using this notation, we describe multidimensional narrowband Gaussian process using M N x

M N complex covariance matrix. This result is then used in STAP formula in (2.13) as Rk . The
rest of (2.13) - ss−t (fsp , fd ) - can be viewed as a matched filtering. For other distributions of
the clutter, covariance matrix does not describe distribution entirely, so test statistics must be
reformulated. In this case, optimum detector will not necessary be a linear filter as discussed
in section 2.3.
Estimate of R−1
k .
As it is stated on page 17, in practice we do not know real covariance matrix. Therefore we
must use an estimator. Usually Sample Covariance Matrix (SM) is used [37]:
P
1 X
R̂k = xm xH
m (2.17)
P
m=1
where vectors xm are usually taken from neighboring cells of space-time snapshot of data cube
(see Fig. 2.19). This estimator is Minimum Likelihood Estimator if xm are IID (Independent
and Identically Distributerd). Moreover they should come from the same distribution as
the clutter at the range cell of interest (this restriction is called homogeneity condition).
Additionally we must exclude target signal from samples taken for calculating SM. Therefore
we must exclude sample from range cell of interest and samples in vicinity (guard cells).
Moreover, for SM to be invertible P must be greater than dimension of covariance matrix
[12], which is M N - see Fig.2.19 and (2.8). However, for good performance, P should be
greater than 2M N [50].
For practical applications, for example M = 22, N = 128 and P > 5632, it may be
difficult to provide adequate homogeneous sample support.
2.3 Detection Principles: Neyman-Pearson Test.
In this section Neyman-Pearson Test will be introduced. It is worth to mention, that there
is a possibility to adopt other approach like Bayesian reasoning or non-parametric tests. In
this work, however, author concentrated on classical Neyman-Pearson theory. First, it will
be shown LRT for simple hypothesis testing. After it will be shown GLRT that it is often
used for composite hypothesis testing. Finally, it will be presented Locally Optimum (LO)
test, that can be used under certain constraints for composite alternative hypothesis. Two
examples of LO test will be shown.
2.3.1 Notation.
Let us assume random vector X = (X1 , X2 , X3 , . . . , Xn ) of observations with joint probability

density function (PDF) fX (x|θ), where θ is a parameter of the density function. Let x =
(x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xn ) be a vector of observations (specific realization of X ) in Rn . Let us further
assume that θ ∈ Θ = ΘH0 ∪ ΘH1 , ΘH0 and ΘH1 are disjoint. Hypothesis testing can be viewed
now as deciding between:
H0 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ ∈ ΘH0

(2.18)
H1 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ ∈ ΘH1
Decision should be based on observations x. Let us use δ(x) symbol for the decision
function. δ(x) = 0 means adoption of hypothesis H0 , δ(x) = 1 means adoption of hypothesis
H1 . If set ΘH0 consists of a single element θH0 only, we say that hypothesis zero is simple,
otherwise we say that hypothesis zero is composite. Similar relates to alternative hypothesis
H1 .
The power function p(θ|δ) of a test based on a test function δ is defined for θ ∈ ΘH0 ∪ ΘH1
as:
p(θ|δ) = E {δ(x)|θ} (2.19)
In target detection problems, power function can be viewed as a function that gives probability
of detection as a function of unknown parameter θ. Usually we want this function to be high
for θ ∈ ΘH1 .
The size of a test is the quantity:
α = supθ∈ΘH p(θ|δ) (2.20)

0
Size of a test in radar target detection problem is translated to the probability of a false
alarm. The aim is to have power function (probability of detection) high, meanwhile having
size of a test (probability of false alarm) reasonably low.
2.3.2 Neyman-Pearson Lemma.
Let us consider simple hypothesis H0 (θ = θH0 ) and simple hypothesis H1 (θ = θH1 ). General
structure of a most powerful test2 may be described as one comparing the likelihood ratio to
a constant threshold [35],
fX (x|θH1 )
>t (2.21)
fX (x|θH0 )
If the likelihood ratio on the left-hand side of (2.21) is greater than threshold t, than we
decide to accept hypothesis H1 . Constant t may be evaluated to obtain desired test size α.
2.3.3 Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test.
Let us consider again general test of the form (2.18) - composite hypothesis testing. To use
Neyman-Pearson Lemma and likelihood ratio test (2.21) we can adopt maximum likelihood
estimates θ̂H0 and θ̂H1 of the parameter θ, obtained under the constraints θ ∈ ΘH0 and
θ ∈ ΘH1 respectively [35]. These estimates can be used in place of θH0 and θH1 in (2.21). Test
2
Most powerful test is a hypothesis test which has the greatest power among all possible tests of a given
size.
derived in this procedure is named General Likelihood Ratio Test. It is possible to consider
a special case of this test, when null hypothesis is composite and alternative hypothesis is
simple. This is often the case in radar signal processing, when we want to detect a target
echo.
H0 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ = θH0 against
(2.22)
H1 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ 6= θH0
Then θ̂H0 can be replaced by exactly known θH0 , and GLRT looks as follows:
fX (x|θ̂H1 )
>t (2.23)
fX (x|θH0 )
denumerator is of the same as in LRT, and numerator comes from GLRT. This is form, that
will be later used in derivation of target detectors.
2.3.4 Alternative Hypothesis of the Form θ > θH0 .
Sometimes it is possible to derive other detectors based on LRT. This time we assume a
special form of the test:

(2.24)
H1 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ > θH0
We now say that H0 is a simple hypothesis, but H1 is composite. In this case we can derive
Locally Optimum (LO) test. This means that, for assumed test size α, decision function will
be most powerful in vicinity of θH0 in deciding against θ > θH1 . Test structure is as follows
[35]: ¯
¯
d ¯
dθ fX (x|θ)¯
θ=θH0
>t (2.25)
fX (x|θH0 )
where t is again threshold appropriately chosen to achieve desired test size. It can be seen that
denominator of test statistics is the same as in (2.23). Numerator is however of an arbitrary
form adjusted to be optimal in vicinity of θH0 . This detector will behave properly for θs close
to θH0 . This test can be also viewed as [35]:
¯
d ³ ´¯
¯
ln fX (x|θ) ¯ >t (2.26)
dθ ¯
θ=θH0
The problem with its practical use is the necessity of knowing derivative of likelihood function.
2.3.5 Alternative Hypothesis of the Form θ 6= θH0 .
There are also many situations when we need to test two sided alternative hypothesis - the
same as GLRT in (2.23):

(2.27)
H1 : X has PDF fX (x|θ) with θ 6= θH0
H0 is again simple hypothesis, H1 is composite. In this case we can also derive LO test. In
order to achieve this, we need to impose some restrictions to the test function. Test function
must be unbiased. Which means that test satisfies [35]:
p(θ|δ) ≤ α, for all θ ∈ ΘH0

(2.28)
p(θ|δ) ≥ α, for all θ ∈ ΘH1
For the two-sided alternative hypothesis, Locally Optimum(LO) looks as follows

[35]:
d2
f (x|θ)|θ=θH
dθ2 X 0
>t (2.29)
fX (x|θH0 )
where t is, again, threshold appropriately chosen to achieve desired test size. The same as
before, it can be seen that denominator of test statistics is the same as in (2.23). Numerator
is again of an arbitrary form adjusted to be optimal in vicinity of θH0 . This detector will
behave properly for θ’s close to θH0 . This time it is necessary to know second derivative of
a likelihood function. Therefore, though it may be interesting to apply these detectors for
non-Gaussian clutter, in the rest of the work GLRT test in the form (2.23) will be used.
GLRT test can be applied in more general case and in many situations GLRT is simpler to
derive and analyse.
2.4 Examples
In this section, two examples will be presented as an illustration of the tests presented in
section 2.3. These two examples are close to the problems faced in radar target detection.
2.4.1 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals in Narrowband Noise.
Beneath will be presented an example of deriving LO detector in the case, where we can
obtain a simple form of derivatives for uncorrelated noise. We will use model:
X(t) = θυ(t) cos[ω0 t + φ(t)] + W (t) (2.30)
Here υ(t) and φ(t) are known amplitude and phase modulations. θ is overall signal amplitude.
Noise process W (t) will be assumed to be stationary, zero mean, band-pass white noise with
a constant power spectral density N0 /2 over the band of interest (and zero outside). We are
interested in testing θ = 0 against θ > 0. After quadrature detection with carrier frequency
ω0 and sampling with Nyquist frequency, we receive in-phase and quadrature samples xIi and
xQi , where i = 1 . . . n. Samples can include signal part and noise part:
xIi = θsIi + wIi

(2.31)
xQi = θsQi + wQi
Following the (2.30) we will assume that wIi form a sequence of i.i.d. random variables,
governed by a common univariate density function fL . Similarly we assume the same for wQi
with the same PDF fL . We also assume that sIi and sIi are completely known.
Components wIi and wQi are uncorrelated for each i [56](from [35]), but independent only
for the Gaussian case. Therefore we must adopt bivariate probability density function fIQ ,
for which marginal density functions are fl . To summarize, we assume two dimensional noise
samples (WIi , WQi ) that are i.i.d. random variables with common bivariate PDF fIQ .
Moreover we assume that fIQ is a circularly symmetric 3 bivariate density function, which
√
means that fIQ (u, υ) can be written as a function of u2 + υ 2 :
¯
¯
fIQ (u, υ) = h(r)¯ √ 2 2 (2.32)
r= u +υ
In this situation LO statistics can be derived using (2.25), and takes on the form [35]:
n
X −h0 (ri )
λLO (XI , XQ ) = [sIi xIi + sQi xQi ] (2.33)
ri h(ri )
i=1
q
where ri = x2Ii + x2Qi . In (2.33) we can distinguish two elements. Nonlinear envelope modifi-
−h0 (ri )
cation ri h(ri ) and linear operation on I and Q components: sIi xIi +sQi xQi (matched filtering).
−h0 (ri )
For the special case of Gaussian noise components, ri h(ri ) becomes constant and LO filter
becomes the usual matched filter [35]:
n
X
λLO (XI , XQ ) = [sIi xIi + sQi xQi ] (2.34)
i=1
2.4.2 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals with Random Phase An-

gles.
Next example illustrates also LO detector. Model in this situation is different from (2.30) in
the sense that we introduce additional random starting phase ψ of our signal of interest:
X(t) = θυ(t) cos[ω0 t + φ(t) + ψ] + W (t) (2.35)
We assume that ψ is uniformly distributed over [0, 2π]. After similar operations as for (2.30),
we get samples:
xIi = θ[sIi cos ψ + sQi sin ψ] + wIi
(2.36)
xQi = θ[sIi sin ψ + sQi cos ψ] + wQi
To simplify formulation let us introduce additional notation:
Xi = (xIi , xQi )
Yi = (−xQi , xIi )
si = (sIi , sQi ) (2.37)
υi2 = s2Ii + s2Qi
q
ri = x2Ii + x2Qi
LO detector test statistics can be derived using (2.29), and becomes [35]:
( )
1 X 2 h00 (ri ) h h0 (ri ) i2
n
h0 (ri )
λLO (XI , XQ ) = υi − +
2 h(ri ) h(ri ) ri h(ri )
i=1
" n #2 " n #2
1 X −h0 (ri ) T 1 X −h0 (ri ) T
+ si Xi + si Yi (2.38)
2 ri h(ri ) 2 ri h(ri )
i=1 i=1
3
More general multivariate case of spherically invariant random processes will be discussed later
This form is very complicated and includes matched filtering together with nonlinear
envelope modification similarly to the previous example. Even in Gaussian case, this detector
remains non-linear.
Generally it is quite difficult to derive LO detectors. For calculations to be feasible it
is desirable to have uncorrelated noise. On the other hand, GLRT test is based directly on
Neyman-Pearson test and in many cases is easier to calculate. Therefore in the rest of this
work only GLRT will be considered.
2.5 Spherically Invariant Random Process (SIRP).
In this section theory of SIRP will be introduced. In fact, as we detail in chapter 3, the SIRP
can model a large number of distortions that have been used for sea clutter. This is a very
usefull tool, that will be used in other sections of this work.
Spherically Invariant Random Process can be represented as [2]:
Z = σI
where Z denotes n-dimensional Spherically Invariant Random Vector (SIRV), I is a n-

dimensional multivariate Gaussian random vector and σ is a positive random scalar with
assumed probability density function (PDF). SIRP allows to relax assumption of Gaussian-
ity, while keeping many of its useful characteristics [2]. PDF of a SIRV vector can be presented
in the following form [49]:
Z ∞
1 1 − Z T M −1 Z
f (Z) = e 2σ 2 dGσ (σ) (2.39)
(2π)n/2 |M |1/2 0 σ n
Gσ (σ) denotes cumulative distribution function of σ If E(σ 2 ) = 1 then M = E[ZZ T ]. For

further analysis we introduce complex notation using transformation:
 
z1 + jzn/2+1
 
X =  ...  (2.40)
zn/2 + jzn
let us denote dimension of X by m = n/2. PDF of a vector X can be presented in the
following form [10]:
Z ∞
1 1 X H Φ−1 X
f (X) = m 2m
e− σ2 dGσ (σ) (2.41)
π |Φ| 0 σ
Similarily if E(σ 2 ) = 1 then Φ = E[XX H ]. If we assume continuous case for σ distribution
then we have: Z ∞
1 1 − X H Φ2−1 X
f (X) = m e σ g(σ)dσ (2.42)
π |Φ| 0 σ 2m
and g(σ) is called characteristic PDF of a SIRP. It will be useful to introduce one more
√
representation of a SIRP. Let τ = σ 2 , then σ = τ , dτ = 2σdσ and dσ = 2dτ
√ . Therefore
τ
Z ∞ √
1 1 − X H Φ−1 X g( τ )
f (X) = m e τ √ dτ (2.43)
π |Φ| 0 τm 2 τ
√
g( τ )
where √
2 τ
is a PDF of a τ . Let us denote this PDF as f (τ ) so:
Z ∞
1 1 − X H Φ−1 X
f (X) = m e τ f (τ )dτ (2.44)
π |Φ| 0 τm
or in more general form

Z ∞
1 1 − X H Φ−1 X
f (X) = m
e τ dFτ (τ ) (2.45)
π |Φ| 0 τm
where Fτ (τ ) denotes cumulative distribution function for τ . We can assume restriction for τ :
E(τ ) = 1. Under this restriction we have Φ = E{X H X}, and this is a covariance matrix of
X [49]. This form will be used in the next sections.
Gaussian distribution as a special case of SIRP.
Let δ(x) denotes Dirac-delta function. If we assume dFτ (τ ) = δ(τ0 ) in (2.45), then
1 1 − X H Φτ −1 X
f (X) = e 0 (2.46)
π m |Φ| τ0m
In above expression we recognize multivariate complex Gaussian random process. We can

therefore say, that SIRP is a generalization of a Gaussian process.
2.6 Likelihood Ratio Test and Generalized Likelihood Ratio

Test applied to the Spherically Invariant Random Process.
In this section it will be shown how to derive LRT and GLRT for SIRP. In the case of exactly
known signal we can use LRT, whereas in the case of not known amplitude and phase we
need to employ GLRT. It will be shown, that STAP is a special case of GLRT.
2.6.1 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals - Likelihood Ratio Test.
If we know exactly the signal we want to detect, we can employ LRT. After deriving the test,
it will be shown, that for a threshold equal 1, test statistics becomes matched filter.
Let now X be an m-dimensional SIRV, S is the known m-dimensional complex signal
vector, Y is the m-dimensional complex vector of observations. Let us consider following
hypothesis test:
H0 : Y = X
H1 : Y = X + S
Using (2.45), it is possible to find expressions for PDF of Y under both hypotheses [52]:
Z ∞
1 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y
H0 : f (Y ) = e τ dFτ (τ )
π m |Φ| 0 τm
Z ∞
1 1 − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S)
H1 : f (Y ) = e τ dFτ (τ )
π m |Φ| 0 τm
From general result of (2.21), Likelihood Ratio statistics is given by

[52]:
R ∞ 1 − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S)
me τ dFτ (τ )
η = 0 Rτ Y H Φ−1 Y (2.47)
∞ 1 −
0 τm e dFτ (τ )
τ
If distribution function of τ is continuous then we have:

R∞ 1 −
(Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S)
0 τm e f (τ )dτ
τ
η= R ∞ 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y (2.48)
0 τm e f (τ )dτ
τ
Simplified Result. Let us investigate result (2.47) more deeply (similar derivation to [59]).
If we compare test statistics to the threshold:
R∞ 1 −
(Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) H1
0 τm e dFτ (τ )
τ
η= R ∞ 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y ≷ t, (2.49)
0 τm e dFτ (τ ) H0
τ
we see that it can be rearranged:
Z ∞ H1 Z ∞
1 − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y
m
e τ dFτ (τ ) ≷ t e τ dFτ (τ )
0 τ 0 τm
H0
Z ∞ Z ∞ H1
1 − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y
⇔ e τ dFτ (τ ) − t e τ dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0
0 τm 0 τm
H0
Z ∞h H1
1 − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) 1 − Y H Φ−1 Y i
⇔ e τ − t e τ dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0
0 τm τm
H0
Z H1
∞
1 h − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) H −1 i
− Y Φτ Y
⇔ e τ − te dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0 (2.50)
0 τm
H0
Now if we take threshold to be equal 1:
Z H1
∞
1 h − (Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) H −1 i
− Y Φτ Y
e τ − e dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0 (2.51)
0 τm
H0
Keeping in mind, that τ is positive and the fact that function ex is monotonous, it can be
concluded that the sign of the expression:
(Y −S)H Φ−1 (Y −S) Y H Φ−1 Y

e− τ − e− τ
depends only on the difference between (Y − S)H Φ−1 (Y − S) and Y H Φ−1 Y . This is true for
every τ . Recalling again that τ is positive it can be concluded, that the sign of the function
under integral in (2.51) depends only on the difference (Y − S)H Φ−1 (Y − S) − Y H Φ−1 Y , and
therefore the sign of the result also depends on this difference. So finally, our detector from
(2.51) turns out to be a linear filter:
H1
Y H Φ−1 Y ≷ (Y − S)H Φ−1 (Y − S) (2.52)
H0
further simplifications:
H1
H −1
Y Φ Y ≷ (Y − S)H Φ−1 Y − (Y − S)H Φ−1 S
H0
H1
⇔ Y H Φ−1 Y ≷ Y H Φ−1 Y − S H Φ−1 Y − Y H Φ−1 S + S H Φ−1 S
H0
H1
⇔ S H Φ−1 Y + Y H Φ−1 S ≷ S H Φ−1 S
H0
H1
⇔ S H Φ−1 Y ≷ S H Φ−1 S/2
H0
result is:
H1
S H Φ−1 Y 1
≷ (2.53)
S H Φ−1 S 2
H0
the expression on the left side is possibly complex. Therefore it is necessary to take module
value of the numerator:
H
|S H Φ−1 Y | 1 1
≷ (2.54)
S H Φ−1 S 2
H0
This result shows, that in case of SIRP as a model for the clutter, optimum detector is
a matched filter, but only under condition that threshold in (2.49) is equal 1. This is not
true for other thresholds, because integral (2.51) cannot be simplified. Therefore it can be
concluded, that this is not an interesting simplification, since it gives no possibility to adjust
probability of false alarm or probability of detection (both of which depend on the threshold).
It is necessary to have a detector independent on the threshold.
2.6.2 Detection of Known Narrowband Signals with Random Phase Angles

and Random Amplitude - GLRT Detector.
This is more realistic scenario in radar applications. Our target signal is known precisely but
its initial amplitude and phase are not known. In such a case we cannot employ LRT. Instead
we need to use GLRT. It will be shown how to derive such a test in the case of Spherically
Invariant Random Process. After, it will be shown the same simplification as for LRT. In this
case however, this simplification is useless. At the end of this section it will be shown, that
in fact, classical STAP is a special case of GLRT for SIRP.
Let now S = aS0 , where S0 is the completely known m-dimensional signal vector with
magnitude 1 (S0H S0 = 1) and a is the unknown complex amplitude. It is now possible to
derive GLRT (see section 2.3.3 on page 20).
Taking into account (2.45), GLRT statistics becomes [52]:

R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 )
0 τ m exp(− τ )dFτ (τ )
η= R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y
(2.55)
where || denotes magnitude, and
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
|ρ|2 = (2.56)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
In the case when distribution of τ is continuous:
R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 )
0 τ m exp(− τ )f (τ )dτ
η= R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y
(2.57)
0 τ m exp(− τ )f (τ )dτ
where f (τ ) is called characteristic PDF of SIRV.
Simplified Result. We want to perform similar reasoning to that in section 2.6.1. Similar
result to (2.50) is given by:
Z H1
∞
1 h − Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 ) H −1 i
− Y Φτ Y
e τ − te dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0 (2.58)
0 τm
H0
Let t be equal 1:
Z H1
∞
1 h − Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 ) H −1 i
− Y Φτ Y
e τ −e dFτ (τ ) ≷ 0 (2.59)
0 τm
H0
this is equivalent to (assuming τ > 0):

Ã ! H
1
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
−Y H Φ−1 Y 1− ≷ − Y H Φ−1 Y (2.60)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
H0
further:
H
(Y H Φ−1 Y )|S0H Φ−1 Y |2 1
−Y H Φ−1 Y + ≷ − Y H Φ−1 Y (2.61)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
H0
after simplification:
H
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2 1
≷ 0 (2.62)
S0H Φ−1 S0
H0
so finally our detector turns out to be:
H1
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2 ≷ 0 (2.63)
H0
Of course left side will be greater than zero always, so in this case detector will always report
target. Although simplification is possible, however it does not give reasonable results and it
will not be considered in the rest of this work.
GLRT for Gaussian Clutter - a STAP Formula. In section 2.2.5 a classical STAP
filter was shown. Optimum test statistics is given in (2.14) and can be derived using (2.55),
which will be shown in this section. First, for the Gaussian process, τ is constant (let us
assume equal to σ). This means that Stieltjes integrals vanish, and we have formula for test
statistics:
1 Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 )
σ m exp(− σ )
η= 1 H
Y Φ Y−1 (2.64)
σ m exp(− σ )
after simplification:
H Φ−1 Y
(1−|ρ|2 )
exp(− Y σ )
η= Y H Φ−1 Y
(2.65)
exp(− σ )
and taking natural logarithm:
Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 ) Y H Φ−1 Y
η 0 = [− ] − [− ] (2.66)
σ σ
constant σ can be included in the threshold:
η 00 = [−Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )] − [−Y H Φ−1 Y ] (2.67)
after rearrangement:
η 00 = Y H Φ−1 Y − [Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )] (2.68)
further:
η 00 = Y H Φ−1 Y |ρ|2 (2.69)
and substituting expression for |ρ|2 from (2.56):
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
η 00 = Y H Φ−1 Y (2.70)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
which finally gives formula equivalent to (2.14):
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
η 00 = . (2.71)
(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
Variance Estimation. In (2.71) we assume, that covariance matrix (and its inverse) is
known. This is not true in general. In (2.14) inverse of the sample covariance matrix Φ̂−1
is used as an inverse covariance matrix estimator in place of true inverse covariance matrix
Φ−1 . But this detector (2.14) is not GLRT detector anymore. It can be found in [51] that
GLRT under assumption that covariance is unknown is given by:
H1
|S0H Φ̂−1 Y |2
³ ´ ≷ t (2.72)
S0H Φ̂−1 S0 1 + P1 Y H Φ̂−1 Y H0
where t is a threshold and Φ̂ is given by:

P
1 X
Φ̂ = xm xH
m (2.73)
P
m=1
as in (2.17).
It can be seen that for large P (2.72) becomes (2.14).
2.7 Conclusions
This chapter introduced basic radar systems concepts. After general introduction to radar
principles in section 1, a STAP technique was described in section 2. Rationale standing be-
hind introduction of STAP was presented. STAP processing algorithm together with assump-
tions and limitations was shown. Next section presented more general view to the problem
of detection. This is necessary in the context of non-Gaussian signals. In the same section
Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test was presented. For completeness Locally Optimum detec-
tor was also shown. To resolve the problem of non-Gaussianity, at certain stage there is a
need to introduce the model of distortions. This was done in the next section, where Spheri-
cally Invariant Random Process (SIRP) was introduced. Using this concept and GLRT it was
possible to present general form of a test adjusted to the SIRP for the signal with unknown
phase. As it will be shown in the next chapter, problem of non-Gaussianity is a real problem
in radar detection in the case of sea clutter, where reflections come from the sea surface which
has a very complicated, non-linear physics. In this context GLRT for SIRP will be a basic
tool for improving detection performance. Having validated the need of target detection in
non-Gaussian clutter, practical implementation of a GLRT for SIRP will be presented in the
chapter 4.
3
CHAPTER
Sea Clutter.
In this chapter sea clutter properties will be described. After short introduction, sea clutter
properties will be presented for X-band and HF-band radar systems. HF-band results will be
based on author’s experiments with real data.
Sea clutter signal properties are related to sea roughness. It is common assumption to
decompose sea roughness to capillary waves and to gravity waves (swell) [28] [31]. The electro-
magnetic wave that is backscattered by capillary waves modulated by three marine features
(wind, gravity waves, current) has wavelength of order of centimeters or less [28]. Their restor-
ing force is the surface tension. Gravity waves have wavelengths ranging from few hundred
meters to less than a meter [31]. Swells are produced by stable winds. Their restoring force
is the force of gravity. If we consider time relations, first results of a wind are capillary waves
[28]. As capillary waves build up, their energy is transfered in a nonlinear process to waves
with larger amplitudes and wavelengths. Sudden cessation of wind causes short waves to de-
cay rapidly, whereas the longer waves can last several days. In reality sea state is a complex
mixture of shorter and longer waves coming from different directions.
Waves can be characterized by their height, length and period. Wavelength and period
are in a relation, whereas waveheight fluctuates considerably [31].
Because of different length scales of different sea-wave types, sea clutter for different radar
bands will have different properties. Note that for example for HF radar band (3-30 MHz)
capillary waves will have no effect on clutter properties, whereas for X-band systems, they
will have an important influence. However some general comments can be made. Doppler
spectrum of sea clutter results from two main processes: the spread about the mean Doppler
frequency is a manifestation of the random motion of the unresolved scatters, while the
displacement of the mean Doppler frequency is caused by the evolution of resolved waves
[31], in particular by the effects of currents.
Clutter properties are strongly related to grazing angle. Grazing angle is the angle at
which radar beam illuminates the surface with respect to the local horizontal. For HF radar
systems, grazing angles are almost always small, since these radars are usually installed at the
sea coast or onboard of ships. For X-band and S-band radar systems, grazing angles can vary
from 0 to 90 degrees. For high grazing angles, statistical properties are usually considered
Gaussian, whereas for low grazing angles for X-band and S-band radars, statistical properties
of the clutter can not be anymore considered Gaussian. For this reason we have considered
the influence of this departure in the next chapter (chapter 4) , which deals with the detection
step of the STAP.
CHAPTER 3. SEA CLUTTER. 32
Figure 3.1 — Typical X-band, sea-clutter spectra in the upswell and near cross-swell di-
rections for vertical (upper figure) and horizontal (lower figure) polarizations [9].
3.1 Sea clutter characterization in X band.
X-band radar systems operate at frequencies between 8 GHz and 12 GHz. Wavelength is
therefore between 2.5 cm to 3.75 cm. This is very important, since structures of this size will
influence statistical properties of the clutter in this case.
At the beginning let us consider spectral properties of the clutter. In Figure 3.1 it is
shown clutter power as a function of Doppler frequency for different look angles of radar and
for different polarizations. It is clear, that sea clutter has broad Doppler spectrum and its
maximum is related to look angle. Obviously, this spectrum Doppler hides the target Doppler
and strongly disturbs usual methods such as MTI. This relation cannot be explained in the
terms of wind direction in a simple way [9]. Some of other factors that play an important
role are sea currents and variability of wind direction. Generally, for horizontal polarization,
clutter has narrower Doppler spectrum. For both polarizations clutter power is substantially
higher in directions of positive Doppler shift. Generally, power decreases as the look direction
moves away from the upswell direction.
In Fig. 3.2 general trend of mean Doppler frequency against azimuth angle is presented.
It is seen that relation takes on the form of sinusoid. More detailed discussion on Doppler
peak spectral shift can be found in [57], where models for Doppler shift are presented.
Figure 3.2 — Plot showing the trend of mean Doppler frequency against azimuth angle
[8].
Observation that clutter power and Doppler shift depend on look angle may lead to
conclusion, that in this case the application of STAP technique is worth to be considered, as
discussed in section 2.2. Relative dependence between the look angle and the Doppler shift of
the clutter was a rationale standing behind STAP application for airborne radar as described
in section 2.2. In Fig. 3.3 it is shown how radar cross section is changing with grazing angle.
We can see general trend, that with higher grazing angle, radar cross section increases. As it
will be shown later, statistical properties of the clutter will be changing with grazing angle
as well.
Next important property of the clutter is its amplitude distribution. In the table 3.1 we see
different distributions used to describe clutter properties. Depending on situation, different
models can describe clutter. Basic model is Rayleigh model. It is useful in many situations,
for example for low resolution radars with a high grazing angle. If we are dealing with higher
resolution radar (especially for low grazing angles) it turns out that statistical properties are
different. The reason behind this is the law of large numbers. In the case of low resolution
radar, many independent scattering centers contribute to overall radar cross section of a
single resolution cell. In this case the law of large numbers states, that complex samples
should be Gaussian distributed, and therefore envelope should be Rayleigh distributed [53].
On the other hand, for higher resolutions, there are only few scattering centers in a single
resolution cell, and therefore their statistical properties have direct influence on radar clutter
properties. This is additionally augmented by the effect of low grazing angle. This is due to
the fact that for low grazing angles main contribution to clutter RCS are strong reflections
from wave crests which are few in a single range cell.
It is worth noticing, that goodness of fit is much more important in the low probability
of false alarm regions (ie. tails of the distribution that are well described by the third order
moment of PDF). Therefore chi-square goodness of fit test is of limited use [9], since this
kind of test mainly compares general shapes (theoretical and estimated) and is not focused
on the tail of the distribution.
In Fig. 3.4 and 3.5 it is shown Probability of False Alarms (Pf a ) as a function of threshold.
In these figures we can see probability of false alarm for a given threshold. A choice of the
Table 3.1 — Different clutter distributions [9].
Rayleigh
2
CDF : P (X) = 1 − exp {− xα } 0≤x≤∞
2x 2
PDF : p(X) = α exp {− xα } 0≤x≤∞
(πα)1/2
first moment: hxi = 2
p
third moment: µ3 = 3(α/2)3/2 π/2
Weibull
n
CDF : P (X) = 1 − exp {− xα } 0≤x≤∞
n−1 2
PDF : p(X) = n x α exp {− xα } 0≤x≤∞
first moment: hxi = α1/n Γ(1 + n1 )
third moment: µ3 = α3/n Γ(1 + 3/n)
Lognormal
CDF : P (X) = 1 − 12 erfc( lnαx−m

1/2 ) 0≤x≤∞
where erfc is the complementary error function.
2
PDF : p(X) = 1
x(πα)1/2
exp{− (ln x−m)
α } 0≤x≤∞
first moment: hxi = exp(m + α4 )
third moment: µ3 = exp(3m + 94 α)
K-distribution
³ ´ν
2 bx
CDF : P (X) = 1 − Γ(ν) 2 Kν (bx) 0≤x≤∞
³ ´ν
2b bx
PDF : p(X) = Γ(ν) 2 Kν−1 (bx) 0≤x≤∞
where Kν−1 (z) is the modified Bessel function of the third kind of order ν
√
π
first moment: hxi = bΓ(ν) Γ(ν + 21 )
Γ(ν+3/2)Γ(1+3/2)
third moment: µ3 = b3 Γ(ν)
Figure 3.3 — Sea clutter cross-section against grazing angle profiles of X-band in the
upswell and near cross-swell directions [9].
threshold plays an important role in detection scheme (that is not considered in this work).
If we increase threshold we are reducing the number of false alarms, but at the same time we
are reducing probability of detection. From figures 3.4 and 3.5 it can be seen that the data fit
the K-distribution best in the amplitude region for which the Pf a is ≤ 0.1 [9]. This is true for
resolutions of order of 15 to 150 m. The same conclusion is confirmed in [8]. This observation
implies, that detectors developed for Rayleigh clutter will not be appropriate in the case of
low grazing angle radars.
For higher resolutions, we can even resolve single wave crest, as it is visible in Fig. 3.6.
Images show power range-time diagrams for X-band 50 cm resolution radar. Wave crests
are traveling toward radar. In such a case, to detect targets it may be reasonable to apply
image processing algorithms rather than classical radar detection methods. Moreover several
furtive ”superevents” are observed by an X band radar. These superevents are due to wave
breaking and generate strong scatterer with high velocity, so they are ”fast scatterers” (see
for example Fig. 3.6). These superevents generate a lot of false alarms (which may lead to
errors in tracking algorithms) and should be processed adaptively.
To deal with non-Gaussianity, it is essential to find a mathematical model for this type of
clutter. It can be found (see for example [52]) that theory of Spherically Invariant Random
Process (SIRP) in many situations is an appropriate model for sea clutter. Theory of SIRP
Figure 3.4 — Comparison of Pf a characteristics of an X-band, V-polarized sea clutter data

set with those predicted by Rayleigh, Weibull, lognormal and K-models [9]. Range resolution
- 15 m.
can be used as a model for different types of clutter (Gaussian, lognormal, K etc..) and have
been exposed in section 2.5. Therefore a new detector presented in chapter 4 is based on
SIRP model.
3.2 Sea clutter characterization in HF band.
In HF radar band, main clutter component is related to Bragg scattering phenomenon. First
description of this type of the clutter can be found in [11]. In the mentioned article, it is
shown that for frequency 13.56 MHz first-order Bragg lines have Doppler shifts −0.38 Hz and
0.38 Hz. General formula for Doppler shift is:
r
g1
∆f = (3.1)
πλ
where g = 9.81m/s2 and λ is a radio wavelength. This formula means that main clutter
components are more or less constant over look angles of the radar and over different ranges.
This comes from the fact, that resonance occurs when λ = 2L (where L denotes sea wave
length) and the speed of the sea wave is related to its length by the formula
r
g
v= L (3.2)
2π
Figure 3.5 — Comparison of Pf a characteristics of an X-band, V-polarized sea clutter data

set with those predicted by Rayleigh, Weibull, lognormal and K-models [9]. Range resolution
- 150 m.
Figure 3.6 — Power range-time diagrams for VV polarization (a) and HH polarization (b).
Range resolution 50 cm [42].
This mechanizm is called first order Bragg scattering and is responsible for constant Doppler
shift of Bragg lines. However for higher Doppler resolutions other factors play role, and in fact
Bragg lines are changing slightly accross angles and ranges. This is caused by complicated sea
wave dynamics. These effects make target detection more difficult and are the reason to use
STAP. Bragg scattering mechanism is commonly used for sea parameters extraction such as
wave height, currents velocity and direction [5]. More detailed description of such possibilities
can be found in [30] and [29]. Registered signals from WERA system working in Brittany
in France were used to present clutter properties. System description is presented in section
5.1. Results are obtained by beamforming followed by Doppler processing. At the day of data
collection radar was working at frequency around 12 MHz.
In Fig. 3.7 are presented range-Doppler maps for an exemplary beam. Maps are obtained
for different integration times and therefore for different Doppler resolutions. First map was
obtained for 48 chirps. Single chirp duration is 0.2275 s, therefore integration time in this
case is 10.9 s. Other maps were obtained using 96 chirps (22 s), 256 chirps (59 s) and 512
(117 s) chirps respectively.
We can see, that indeed there are advance and recede Bragg lines at frequencies -0.35 Hz
ans +0.35 Hz as predicted by theory (for 12 MHz carrier frequency). It is visible, that Bragg
lines are present in all range cells until approximately 90 km, where noise level becomes higher
than sea clutter. This is a result of a very low power transmitted by radar, which is at most
30 W. Bragg lines frequencies are constant across all range cells. In the short distance from
radar we can see also land clutter. Comparing images in Fig. 3.7 we can see, that for higher
integration time Bragg lines become very thin. This observation has two consequences. First
one is that first-order ocean wave scattering is coherent even for 2 minutes (512 chirps). The
second is that since Bragg lines are very thin in Doppler, having long integration time, may
give us better opportunities to reveal targets whose Doppler frequency is very close to Bragg
line.
In Fig. 3.8 we can see Doppler spectra for range cell number 50, this is 20 km. These
images illustrate how integration time increases influence Bragg lines thickness.
In the next figure (3.9) we can see spectra for different ranges (20, 40 and 60 km - range cell
number 50, 100 and 150 respectively). Bragg lines are clearly visible for all ranges but there is
a significant noise level increase relatively to Bragg lines maximum. It is also clearly visible,
that Bragg lines present constant Doppler across all ranges. Images in Fig. 3.10 illustrate that
structure of the first order ocean waves clutter does not change significantly across different
beams.
Fig. 3.11 illustrates again how clutter is changing across beams. It is clear that though
general clutter structure is not changing, Bragg lines Doppler and power is changing across
different azimuths. We can see that Doppler band is changing considerably accross angles.
We also have a slight change in Doppler shift. These are so called second order Bragg effects.
Because of them it is worth to consider using STAP.
Next two figures (3.12 and 3.13) illustrate that clutter can vary only little in time. We can
see spectra for time shifts 0 s, 11 s, 113 s, 226 s (for 0, 50, 500 and 1000 chirps respectively).
In HF radar band there is also high probability of radio interferences. Interferences can
have different sources and properties. For example in Fig. 3.14 we can see an interference
that is relatively weak. It can be seen as a pattern of almost horizontal lines, better visible
in black and white in Fig. 3.15.
Since interference has usually a point source, it is present only in some of beams whereas
Figure 3.7 — Bragg clutter for different integration time (number of chirps processed -
from 48 to 512).
Figure 3.8 — Bragg clutter for different integration time (number of chirps processed -
from 48 to 512), for the selected, 50-th range cell.
Figure 3.9 — Clutter spectra for different ranges (512 chirps integration).
Figure 3.10 — Range-Doppler maps for different beams (512 chirps integration).
Figure 3.11 — Beam-Doppler images for different ranges (512 chirps integration).
Figure 3.12 — Clutter spectra for different starting time of the processing (512 chirps
integration).
Figure 3.13 — Clutter spectra for different starting time of the processing for Range cell
number 50 (512 chirps integration).
Figure 3.14 — Bragg clutter plus interference (256 chirps integration). Interference is vis-
ible as horizontal lines.
Figure 3.15 — Black and white image of Bragg clutter plus interference (256 chirps inte-
gration). Interference is visible as horizontal lines.
Figure 3.16 — Range-angle map of directional interference.
in other beams it is not visible.

In figure 3.16 we can see very strong directional interference. Image presents range-azimuth
map of mean received power. Interference is present for angles between -20 deg to -40 deg.
In Fig. 3.17 we can see range-Doppler map in the beam with interference. See clutter is
completely obscured by interference.
Next figure (3.18) shows time-range structure of the interference. We can see that this
interference has impulsive nature, which means that its power is changing considerably as a
function of chirp number. This property can be used to suppress the interference.
On the other hand, in HF radar systems usually there is no problem with non-Gaussianity,
because range resolution is very low (a few hundred meters to a few kilometers).
3.3 Conclusions
In this chapter the characteristic properties of the sea sea clutter for two radar bands (X
and HF radar bands) were presented. It was shown, that for both bands, sea clutter can
have two dimensional structure in space-time domain. In X-band this was caused by Doppler
shift of clutter related to wind, currents and waves direction as well as possible interference
present in the data. In HF-band it was caused by joint presence of the first and second
order sea clutter (Bragg lines) and interference which is inevitable in this frequency area.
Two dimensional structure of the clutter and interferences is a reason to consider using
STAP technique to improve detection possibilities. This will be verified later by performing
experiments on real, recorded data. For X-band it turns out additionally, that clutter does not
follow classical Rayleigh distribution, and therefore classical adaptive techniques may lead to
increased number of false alarms. This will also be investigated in the next two chapters. To
Figure 3.17 — Range-Doppler map oriented toward interference source.
Figure 3.18 — Time-range structure of the interference.

summarize, we can see that because of:
• Correlated and strong clutter with spread Doppler,
• Clutter that may be nonstationary,
• Impossibility to estimate interference-free clutter and clutter-free interference,
• Lots of parameters to be taken into account,
it is reasonably to consider adaptive (in space and time) methods, such as STAP, although
there are also some other possibilities too. These other methods were not considered in this
work. Among them there is, for example, a method of using passive mode of radar to estimate
interferences [30].
4
CHAPTER
Two Dirac delta

detector.
In this chapter the problem of the detector construction under Non-Gaussianity is addressed.
In section 3.1 it was shown, that sea clutter has statistical properties that deviates from
Gaussian (Rayleigh) case. On the other hand in chapter 2 was presented the GLRT test in
the case of Spherically Invariant Random Process. This detector is capable of dealing with
wide spectrum of non-Gaussian distortions (clutter plus noise) including Weibull, log-normal,
K-distribution and others [52]. There is, however, a problem with its practical use that is
discussed below. In this chapter, I will develop a practical implementation of this detector
named Two Delta Dirac STAP (TDD STAP) detector. First two sections will be devoted to
development of TDD STAP detector. In particular, I discuss the estimation of parameters
used in this nonlinear detector in section 4.2. To evaluate performances of classical STAP
detectors in non-Gaussian clutter, I performed some simulations. Description of simulation
technique is presented in section 4.3. Finally, section 4.4 is devoted to performance evaluation
of different STAP algorithms. Receiver Operation Curves (ROC) are presented. In particular,
we discuss the performances of usual STAP and TDD STAP detector under different kinds
of noise (Gaussian, non-Gaussian). I will show, that new developed TDD STAP detector
can give some improvements in comparison to classical STAP algorithm in the presence of
non-Gaussian clutter.
It is also worth to pay attention to the work done by Frédéric Pascal on the same subject
[47].
4.1 Resolving GLRT.
In section 2.6 it was shown, that GLRT detector for SIRP is of the form of test statistics
(2.55):
R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y (1−|ρ|2 )
η= R∞ 1 Y H Φ−1 Y
(4.1)
where
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
|ρ|2 = (4.2)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
S0 is the completely known m-dimensional signal vector with magnitude 1, Y is a data vector,
m is a data vector dimension, Φ is a covariance matrix of the distortions, τ is a modulating
scalar and H denotes conjugate transpose.
CHAPTER 4. TWO DIRAC DELTA DETECTOR. 51
Figure 4.1 — Original distribution of τ .
The problem now arises how to estimate all necessary parameters and how to calculate
the integrals in the formula (4.1). To do this we should know the distribution of τ (Fig. 4.1).
This is unrealistic, but we have still some options:
1. Assuming Gaussian clutter simplification we put constant τ to achieve solution as in

section 2.6.2 (see Fig. 4.2). For simplicity we prefer to assume τ = 1 that results in
E(τ ) = 1 and Φ = E{X H X} i.e. classical STAP detector for Gaussian clutter [49].
2. We can employ some kind of approximation as in Fig. 4.3. Approximating distribution

may be some arbitrary distribution (for example Gamma). We may also employ some ex-
pansion approximations, for example Edgeworth. The problem with Edgeworth approx-
imation is that it is based on Gaussian distribution, which spreads from minus infinity
to plus infinity, whereas τ is a positive scalar (pure Gaussian and original distribution
are shown in Fig. 4.4).
In this framework, I postulate to apply some other approximation, that will be simple
enough to implement, and at the same time, it will fit well enough real clutter, to give
performance improvement. This approximation is discussed in the next section.
4.2 Two Dirac Deltas approximation.

Solution, that I proposed in [22], is picturized in Fig. 4.5 and is named Two Dirac Delta
(TDD STAP). In the subsection 4.2.1 I will present a first approach in order to introduce the
idea behind the new detector. In the subsection 4.2.2 some improvements are introduced in
order to be more realistic in the noise pdf approximation.
4.2.1 First approach.
I approximate CPDF (Characteristic Probability Distribution Function) by two Dirac deltas.

In the simplest case, both Dirac deltas have equal strength. This solution gives one more
degree of freedom comparing to simple Gaussian clutter case (compare Fig. 4.2 and Fig. 4.5).
We can see, that now instead of a single Dirac delta, there are two Dirac deltas (each one of
Figure 4.2 — Original distribution of τ and Dirac delta simplification.
Figure 4.3 — Original distribution of τ and approximation.
Figure 4.4 — Original distribution of τ and pure Gaussian approximation.

Figure 4.5 — Original distribution of τ and two Dirac delta simplification.
them multiplied by 1/2). One of them is placed in the point a of the τ axis, the other in the
point b (4.5). Selection of a and b is discussed below.
By rewriting (4.1) according to two Dirac delta simplification, we obtain:
h H −1 2 H −1 2
i
1/2 a1m exp(− Y Φ Ya(1−|ρ| ) ) + b1m exp(− Y Φ Yb (1−|ρ| ) )
η= h i
H −1 H −1
1/2 a1m exp(− Y Φa Y ) + b1m exp(− Y Φb Y )
H Φ−1 Y
(1−|ρ|2 ) H Φ−1 Y
(1−|ρ|2 )
1
am exp(− Y a ) + 1
bm exp(− Y b )
⇔η= 1 H
Y Φ Y −1 1 H −1 (4.3)
am exp(− a ) + bm exp(− Y Φb Y )
From section 2.5 we have:
E(τ ) = 1 (4.4)
having in mind that τ ≥ 0, we can rewrite:
Z ∞
E(τ ) = τ f (τ )dτ
0
Z ∞ h i
1 1
= τ δ(τ − a) + δ(τ − b) dτ
0 2 2
Z ∞ Z
1 1 ∞
= τ δ(τ − a)dτ + τ δ(τ − b)dτ
2 0 2 0
1 1
= a+ b (4.5)
2 2
Therefore using (4.4), we can write:
1 1
a+ b=1⇔a+b=2⇔a=2−b
2 2
Now if we have true value of variance V AR(τ ) or at least its estimate, then:
1 1
V AR(τ ) = E(τ 2 ) − E 2 (τ ) = a2 + b2 − 1 (4.6)
2 2
1 1
⇔ (2 − b)2 + b2 − 1 − V AR(τ ) = 0
2 2
Figure 4.6 — a, b as a function of V AR(τ ).
Figure 4.7 — ∆ parameter.
⇔ b2 − 2b + 1 − V AR(τ ) = 0
this equation has two solutions if V AR(τ ) is greater than zero (which is always true):
p
b1,2 = 1 ± V AR(τ )
Keeping in mind, that both a and b must be greater than zero we have restriction for the
variance V AR(τ ): p
1 − V AR(τ ) > 0
V AR(τ ) < 1 (4.7)
In Fig. 4.6 we see how a and b depend on V AR(τ ).

To simplify analysis and accordingly (4.5), I introduced additional parameter in place of
a,b. This parameter will be called ∆, and now a = 1 − ∆ and b = 1 + ∆ as in Fig. 4.7.
Since now we have one additional degree of freedom by introducing ∆ parameter, we need
a procedure to estimate this additional parameter. I proposed a closed loop procedure shown
in Fig. 4.8 [24].
Figure 4.8 — ∆ estimation procedure.
Figure 4.9 — Unequal strength Dirac Deltas approximation.
This procedure tries to minimize mean square error between theoretical histogram and
histogram derived from secondary-training data. In the first step, from secondary data, covari-
ance matrix is estimated. Having covariance matrix, it is possible to introduce f (τ ) (texture),
by the integral in the central part of Fig. 4.8. This integral allows us to obtain theoretical
histogram of samples in our model. This histogram is then compared to the true histogram,
obtained from secondary (training) data. Mean square error between theoretical and true
histogram is used to update ∆ parameter. ∆ is then updated to generate texture in integral,
and theoretical histogram is recalculated. Procedure is repeated until difference between the-
oretical and true histogram changes insignificantly. To avoid the problem of local minima,
exhaustive search is used.
4.2.2 Refined approach.
Next step in this reasoning is to introduce not equal strength of Dirac deltas as in Fig. 4.9
[23]. In particular, this approach allows us to break the symmetry of the CPDF and to devote
one Dirac delta to describe the tail of the CPDF which is of great importance as discussed
in section 2.5 and 3.1.
Appropriate automatic procedure to find q,a and b is presented in Fig. 4.10.
This time a,b and q are related to each other. Therefore it is necessary to find only two
of them. This problem can be transformed to the problem of two dimensional optimization
Figure 4.10 — q, a and b estimation procedure.
problem. I proposed Downhill Simplex Method to cope with this problem. This is the main
difference between Fig. 4.8 and Fig. 4.10 .
In order to evaluate behavior of both classical STAP and TDD STAP detectors I per-
formed simulations. Their results are presented in the sections 4.4.3 and 4.4.4.
4.3 Simulations.
To validate algorithms and to evaluate its performances, I generated simulated data. In this
section, simulation technique is described. First subsection describes parameters chosen for
simulations. In subsection 4.3.2 reader can find a description of target simulation. Subsection
4.3.3 is devoted to noise simulation.
4.3.1 Simulation parameters.
In order to perform simulations, it is necessary to choose some parameter set. This parameters
set should be appropriate to the state of the art in radar technology and have been introduced
in section 2.1. I have chosen to simulate airborne system, for which non-Gaussianity may occur
when detecting targets on the sea surface. Airborne radar systems are supposed to be the
primary application of STAP technique [38].
This subsection describes process of choosing the parameter set. Some of the parameters
where taken from a well known DLR system E-SAR :
Carrier center frequency fc = 9.6 GHz

Transmit power P = 2500 W
Pulse bandwidth B = 100 M Hz
Azimuth beamwidth Φ = 17o
Elevation beamwidth Θ = 30o
Platform Velocity Vp = 90 ms
Geometry of the system is presented in Fig. 4.11 and Fig. 4.12. Having carrier frequency
it is possible to calculate wavelength:
c
λ= = 3 cm
fc
Figure 4.11 — Vertical situation.
Figure 4.12 — Earth plane geometry.
Minimum range can be calculated from the formula (approximately, assuming azimuth an-
gle=0):
³ Θ´
Rmin = H · tan ξ −
2
³ Θ´
Rmax = H · tan ξ +
2
Range resolution Rresolution is determined by the pulse bandwidth B:
c
Rresolution = = 1.5 m
2B
where c is the electromagnetic wave speed. Azimuth beamwidth is related to the antenna size
La by equation:
λ 17o
=Φ= π ≈ 0.3
La 180o
Figure 4.13 — Antenna array.
Figure 4.14 — Azimuth angle ambiguity.
so:
La ≈ 10 cm
For STAP a linear antenna array parallel to the flight axis as in Fig. 4.13 is often assumed.
In classical configuration for STAP, array elements spacing d is equal λ2 [37], in this case
1.5 cm. This is technically difficult to achieve, because single antenna is approximately 10 cm
long. Therefore here, spacing d = 10 cm is assumed. In order to avoid angle ambiguity, it is
necessary to calculate ambiguous angle β. This can be done using geometry presented in Fig.
4.14. Ambiguous angle β is defined by the situation where a is equal λ. Therefore:
λ 3
cos α = = = 0.3
La 10
so:
α ≈ 73o
and:
β = 90o − α ≈ 17o
Next parameter to be set is PRF. Let PRF be 4 kHz (for E-SAR it was 1.2 kHz). Now it
is necessary to check range and velocity ambiguity. For range ambiguity, let the maximum
Figure 4.15 — Triangle of velocities.
range Rmax = 30 km. PRF has to be set in accordance with the condition:
c
PRF < = 5 kHz
2Rmax
Second condition concerns velocity ambiguity. First it is necessary to calculate maximum

radial velocity from the ground. This will occur at the maximum range at the edge of the
beam (see Fig. 4.15). Resolving triangle of velocities:
Φ m
Vrmax = Vp · cos(90o − ) = 90 · 0.147 = 13.3
2 s
Additionally some moving targets can be expected. Let the additional radial movement of
the target be limited to 10 m m
s . Overall radial velocity is therefore Vrmax sum = 24 s . It is now
possible to calculate Doppler shift:
2Vrmax sum 2 · 24
fD = = = 1.6kHz
λ 0.03
PRF should be twice the Doppler shift, therefore PRFmin = 3.2 kHz. Last parameter to be
set is dwelling time. Dwelling time determines Doppler resolution which determines veloc-
ity resolution. Let us assume velocity resolution equal 0.1 m s . Therefore Doppler resolution
fD resolution should be:
2 · 0.1 0.2
fD resolution = = ≈ 6Hz
λ 0.03
Dwelling time is given by the formula:
1
TDW ELL = = 1/6 s
fD resolution
Finally, range migration problem should be faced. TDW ELL = 1/6 s gives (assuming 24 m s
radial velocity) 4 m of range migration which is more than range resolution cell (1.5m). To
Figure 4.16 — Radar and target geometry.
resolve this problem, dwelling time reduction can be applied. Considering only 0.5 m
s velocity
resolution gives:
2 · 0.5 1
fD resolution = = ≈ 33Hz
λ 0.03
therefore:
1
TDW ELL = = 0.03 s
fD resolution
Now range migration becomes:
Rmigration = 24 · 0.03 ≈ 0.75m
which is less than range resolution cell.
4.3.2 Target Simulations.
To evaluate probability of detection versus probability of false alarm, I injected target echo
into clutter data. This section describes methodology that was used to do this.
Simulations were based on the backscattered energy given in [45]. Geometry of the radar
platform and the target is shown in Fig. 4.16.
The result of simulations should be a complex data cube:
Data(n, l, k)
where n is a pulse index l is an antenna index and k is range cell index (see section 2.2.5).
For a single target, formula for data cube is given by:
Xn
Data(n, l, k) = KP (n) · σn · ejφ · f (k − ) · AZ(n) · Ant(l, n) (4.8)
Rresolution
where
• KP (n) is radar equation,

• σn is a RCS,
• ejφ is a random unknown phase,
Xn
• f (k − Rresolution ) is a range gate factor,
• AZ(n) is a modulation function,
• Ant(l, n) is factor related to an antenna array element.
In order to calculate all elements of the data cube equation it is necessary to perform pre-
liminary geometrical calculations. After this step, vectors describing positions and relative
angles of the target as well as the radar platform in subsequent moments defined by the PRF,
will be available. In order to achieve this, some radar and target movement models must be
adopted. Let radar platform be flying along Y axis at the speed Vp . Let us assume that, in
the moment t=0 (reception of the first pulse), radar platform position be Y=0. Let us assume
following model for the target movement:
X(t) = X0 + Vt · t (4.9)
Y (t) = Y0 (4.10)
Z(t) = Z0 = 0 (4.11)
Having this information it is possible to calculate slant range to the target (see Fig. 4.16):
q
R(t) = X(t)2 + (Y (t) − Vp · t)2 + H 2
We can also simply calculate angles using formulas

Y (t) − Vp · t
tan(ϕ(t)) =
X(t)
X(t)
tan(α(t)) =
H
π
θ(t) = − χ(t)
2
where (see Fig. 4.17):
Y (t) − Vp · t
tan χ(t) = p
H 2 + X(t)2
We should evaluate above formulas in moments defined by the reception of subsequent
backscattered pulses from the target. Assuming that t0 = 0, these moments can be calculated
from PRF:
n
tn =
PRF
where n is a pulse number starting from 0.
Having all this information, we can now calculate data cube evaluating each term in the
equation (4.8).
• KP (n) - In the simplest case is constant from pulse to pulse (which means, that R
changes only slightly in radar equation during dwelling time). KP (n) also reflects an-
tenna elevation and azimuth pattern. In simulations, we adopted KP (n) = G(ϕn , αn ),
where pattern G(ϕ, α) in azimuth and elevation is shown in Fig. 4.18.
Figure 4.17 — θ and χ.
Figure 4.18 — Single antenna azimuth G(ϕ) (left) and elevation G(α) (right) pattern.
• σn - We can assume Swerling II model for example [39], assuming some mean RCS σ.
Then for each pulse (n) we should choose a random RCS using PDF:
1 − σn
p(σn ) = e σ
σ
The phase is however coherent within CPI.
• ejφ - This is an unknown initial phase of the target signal. We can assume ejφ = 1
without loss of generality.
Rn
• f (k − Rresolution ) is function giving range cell response for the target at a distance Rn .
In the simplest case we can assume rectangular function as shown in Fig. 4.19
• AZ(n) - is a modulating function of the form

4πRn
AZ(n) = e−j λ
• Ant(l, n) is additional phase advance as a result of the antenna elements displacement.

d
Ant(l, n) = e−j2πl λ cos(θn )
Figure 4.19 — f function of range cell response.
4.3.3 Additive Noise.
In order to simulate the data close to the real one, we add noise and clutter to our target data.
This is done using procedure from [49]. More detailed explanations are presented in Appendix
B. This allows us to add Gaussian or non-Gaussian, white or colored noise according to our
needs. In this work three types of noise were used. First type is a classical Gaussian noise.
This noise occurs for low resolution radars, where many scatterers contribute to overall RCS.
This is typical situation for airborne radars at high grazing angles. This noise can be viewed
as a noise with Dirac Delta as a characteristic PDF (see section 2.5) of SIRP (as in Fig.
4.2). The second type is TDD noise. This is a noise generated using two Dirac deltas as a
characteristic PDF (two Dirac deltas in Fig. 4.7). This is an academic example, that will
show how TDD STAP will perform with the same kind of (TDD) of noise. Finally the most
interesting is the case (among these tested in this work) where characteristic PDF is chosen
to obtain K-distributed noise. This kind of noise can occur for high resolution radars on
the sea surface or for radars with low grazing angle. In order to achieve this kind of noise,
characteristic PDF must be of the form [49]:
2b ³ b2 τ 2 ´
2ν−1
f (τ ) = (bτ ) exp − u(τ ) (4.12)
Γ(ν)2ν 2
where Γ(ν) is a gamma function, b and ν are parameters of K-distribution, and u(τ ) is a
unit step function. Covariance marix can also be randomized. Problem of Covariance matrix
structure is separable from the problem of non-Gaussianity as a result of employing SIRP.
After this step we have data, that can be used as an input for a STAP processor. Examples
of results after performing STAP processing are shown in Fig. 4.20-4.22. In figures 4.20-4.22
white covariance matrix is adopted for the purpose of technique demonstration. Last two
figures present results for the same SNR 1 .
Results were generated under the following assumptions:
1 P
SNR is a Signal to Noise Ratio defined as SNR = log10 ( Psignal
noise
), where Psignal is a signal power, and Pnoise
is noise power. In practice, after quadrature receiver, if s denotes signal column vector, and x denotes noise
H
column vector, we use formula SNR = xsH xs
Figure 4.20 — STAP result on target signal without noise (test statistics intensity image).
Figure 4.21 — STAP result on target signal with Gaussian noise (test statistics intensity
image).
Figure 4.22 — STAP result on target signal with non-Gaussian, K-distributed (test statis-
tics intensity image).
X0 = 7000 m
Y0 = 500 m
Vt = 4 m/s
P RF = 4000 Hz
Vp = 90 m/s
L = 16
N = 120
STAP test was performed for discrete velocities [−15 m/s,15 m/s,0.5 m/s ] and azimuth angles
[ −8.5o ,8.5o ,0.5o ].
4.4 Results.
On the basis of simulation experiments I was able to compare different processing algorithms.
In the first subsection I will show, that classical STAP performance becomes worse under non-
Gaussian conditions. As a result of computer precision limitations, TDD STAP detector has
to be slightly modified, which will be presented in section 4.4.2. In section 4.4.3 I will present
comparison between classical STAP and TDD STAP for a priori chosen ∆, and in section
4.4.4, similar comparison for automatic ∆ finding procedure.
4.4.1 Classical STAP detection performance evaluation.
In order to evaluate influence of non-Gaussianity, I performed some tests. Single target signal
was generated using procedure described in section 4.3. This signal was used in all tests. For
different SNRs, Gaussian and non-Gaussian Noise was generated independently 300 times.
300 was chosen to achieve reasonably high (eg.10) number of false alarms. However sometimes
number of repetitions was considerably higher. For each noise trial, classical STAP test was
performed using different thresholds. Classical STAP test (2.14) was performed independently
on Gaussian noise, signal plus Gaussian noise, non-Gaussian noise, signal plus non-Gaussian
noise. Non-Gaussianity was introduced by K-distribution (ν = 2, b = 2 in 4.12) for real
and imaginary samples with unit covariance matrix. False alarms were counted for each trial
based on number of target reports in pure noise (without target signal). Therefore we can
calculate average number of false alarms per STAP image for different SNR’s and thresholds,
independently for Gaussian noise and for non-Gaussian noise. If number of targets reported
in signal plus noise was greater than number of target reported in noise only, we assumed
successful detection. This procedure allows us to obtain probability of detection for different
SNR’s and thresholds for Gaussian and non-Gaussian cases. Other parameters of simulations
are presented below:
X0 = 7000 m
Y0 = 500 m
Vt = 4 m/s
P RF = 4000 Hz
Vp = 90 m/s
L = 8
N = 30
Classical STAP test was performed for discrete velocities [−15 m/s,15 m/s,1 m/s ] and
azimuth angles [ −8.5o ,8.5o ,1o ]. Too low resolution in tests (test grid too sparse) may lead
to some performance deterioration as a result of a mismatch between the true steering vector
and its surrogate from the grid (see section 2.2.5).
In Fig. 4.23 we can see Receiver Operating Curves. Vertical axis denotes Probability of
Detection (PD) and horizontal axis denotes mean number of False Alarms (FA) per single
range cell. For the same PD the aim is to have the lowest possible mean number of FA. We
can see that mean number of FA is higher for non-Gaussian case (having the same PD) in
which the characteristics are shifted to the right (higher mean number of FA). This is true for
any SNR. In Fig. 4.24 we can see, that SNR does not influence number of false alarms (CFAR
property), although number of false alarms increases for non-Gaussian case (characteristics
shifted up, toward higher mean number of FA). Pattern is similar for different thresholds as
a result of using the same target and noise signals.
4.4.2 Numerical simplifications for TDD STAP.
As a result of a finite computer calculation precision, Two Dirac Deltas (TDD STAP) de-
tector presented in section 4.2 needs to be reformulated for practical implementation. In this
subsection, I will show modifications that will be used to implement TDD STAP detector in
Matlab environment.
In section 4.2 Two Dirac Deltas (TDD STAP) detector (4.3) was presented in the form :
H Φ−1 Y
(1−|ρ|2 ) H Φ−1 Y
(1−|ρ|2 )
1
am exp(− Y a ) + 1
bm exp(− Y b )
η= 1 H
Y Φ Y −1 1 H −1 (4.13)
am exp(− a ) + bm exp(− Y Φb Y )
Figure 4.23 — Probability of detection (PD) as a function of mean number of false alarms
per STAP picture (FA number) for different SNR’s for Gaussian and non-Gaussian case.
where
|S0H Φ−1 Y |2
|ρ|2 = (4.14)
(Y H Φ−1 Y )(S0H Φ−1 S0 )
I will use the following transformation:
1
am exp(− Xa ) + 1
bm exp(− Xb )
³ X ´
1 am exp(− b )
= am exp(− Xa ) 1 + m
b exp(− X )
a
³ ´
= 1
am exp(− Xa ) 1 + ( ab )m exp(− Xb + X
a)
³ ´
1 a m
= am exp(− Xa ) 1 1
1 + ( b ) exp ( − X( b − a ))
Let me rewrite test statistics according to the above transformation:
H Φ−1 Y
³ ´
(1−|ρ|2 )
1
am exp(− Y a ) 1 + ( a m
b ) exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( 1 − 1 ))
b a
η= ³ ´ (4.15)
exp(− Y Φa Y ) 1 + ( ab )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( 1b − a1 ))
1 H −1
am
Figure 4.24 — Number of false alarms (FA number) as a function of SNR for different
thresholds (Thr).
1
canceling am :
H Φ−1 Y
³ ´
(1−|ρ|2 )
exp(− Y a ) 1 + ( a m
b ) exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( 1 − 1 ))
b a
η= ³ ´ (4.16)
exp(− Y Φa Y ) 1 + ( ab )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( 1b − a1 ))
H −1
The logarithm of expression (4.16) is given by:
" #
Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )
ln(η) = − (4.17)
a
h a 1 1 i
+ ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − ))
" b # b a
H
Y Φ Y−1
− −
a
h a 1 1 i
− ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( − ))
" b b a#
Y Φ Y − Y Φ Y + Y Φ Y |ρ|2
H −1 H −1 H −1
=
a
h a 1 1 i
+ ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − ))
b b a
h a 1 1 i
− ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( − ))
b b a
H −1
|S Φ Y | 2
=
a(S H Φ−1 S)
h a 1 1 i
+ ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − ))
b b a
h a m 1 1 i
− ln 1 + ( ) exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( − ))
b b a
If −Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( 1b − a1 ) in the nominator of (4.16) is much higher than some value,
depending on the numerical precision (for example 400 in Matlab), we should use approxi-
mation neglecting 1 in:
h a 1 1 i
ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − )) (4.18)
b b a
h a 1 i
m H −1 2 1
≈ ln ( ) exp ( − Y Φ Y (1 − |ρ| )( − ))
b b a
a m 1 1
= ln ( ) − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − )
b b a
Similarly with the denominator.
h a 1 1 i
ln 1 + ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( − )) (4.19)
b b a
h a 1 1 i
≈ ln ( )m exp ( − Y H Φ−1 Y ( − ))
b b a
a m H −1 1 1
= ln ( ) − Y Φ Y ( − )
b b a
Remark
Below I will show, that if we apply two approximations at the same time (for nomi-
nator and denominator), we obtain classical STAP filter.
|S H Φ−1 Y |2
ln(η) =
a(S H Φ−1 S)
a 1 1
+ ln ( )m − Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − )
b b a
a m H −1 1 1
− ln ( ) + Y Φ Y ( − )
b b a
H −1
|S Φ Y | 2
ln(η) =
a(S H Φ−1 S)
1 1
−Y H Φ−1 Y (1 − |ρ|2 )( − )
b a
1 1
+Y H Φ−1 Y ( − )
b a
|S H Φ−1 Y |2 1 1
= H −1
+ Y H Φ−1 Y |ρ|2 ( − )
a(S Φ S) b a
1 |S H Φ−1 Y |2 1 |S H Φ−1 Y |2 1 |S H Φ−1 Y |2

= + −
a (S H Φ−1 S) b (S H Φ−1 S) a (S H Φ−1 S)
1 |S H Φ−1 Y |2
=
b (S H Φ−1 S)
In this case, there is no advantage using TDD STAP detector in comparison with classical
STAP (TDD STAP is equal to classical STAP). Therefore I postulate to use approximations
according to the needs (appropriate procedure should chose simplification only when neces-
sary). This procedure was used in practical implementation of TDD STAP detector. I used
approximation when exponential of nominator or denominator in 4.16 was higher than 400.
4.4.3 Comparison of classical STAP and TDD STAP for fixed ∆ parameter.
I performed comparisons using method described in section 4.4.1. In the first result, the value
of ∆ was not estimated but chosen a priori in order to estimate the discrepancies when ∆ is
poorly estimated. These results were already presented in [22].
In first experiments, Non-Gaussianity was introduced by TDD noise. This means that
CPDF (for SRIP) adopted in noise generation algorithm follows TDD distribution. More
precisely (see section 4.3.3):
1 1
f (τ ) = δ(t − a) + δ(t − b)
2 2
In Fig. 4.25 we can see Probability of Detection (PD) as a function of mean Number of
False Alarms (NFA) for different choice of spread parameter ∆.
• If ∆ approaches 0 or 1, then TDD STAP detector behaves exactly as classical STAP

detector. This is not surprising since for ∆ = 0 or ∆ = 1 expressions for TDD STAP
reduce to classical STAP formula.
• For some values of ∆ parameters (eg. 0.4 or 0.5), newly developed TDD STAP detector
has a better performance than classical STAP.
• Unfortunately for badly chosen ∆ (eg. 0.7) TDD STAP performance is even worse than
classical STAP.
Similar experiments were performed for K-distributed (ν = 2 and b = 2) noise. This time
in noise generation scheme (see section 4.3.3) the function f (τ ) takes on the form:
2b ³ b2 τ 2 ´
2ν−1
f (τ ) = (bτ ) exp − u(τ )
Γ(ν)2ν 2
where Γ(ν) is a gamma function, b and ν are parameters of K-distribution, and u(τ ) is a unit
step function.
Results are presented in Fig. 4.26. Again we can see, that there is some performance
improvement in comparison to classical STAP.
• If ∆ approaches 0 or 1, then TDD STAP detector behaves exactly like classical STAP
detector.
• When ∆ is appropriately chosen (eg. 0.3 or 0.4), TDD STAP detector has better perfor-
mance than classical STAP.
Figure 4.25 — Probability of Detection (PD) as a function of mean Number of False

Alarms (NFA) for TDD STAP detector in the presence of Gaussian and TDD noise for
different values of ∆.
Figure 4.26 — Probability of Detection (PD) as a function of mean Number of False

Alarms (NFA) for TDD STAP detector in the presence of Gaussian and K-distributed noise
for different values of ∆.
• If ∆ is badly chosen (∆ = 0.7) than TDD STAP performance is worse than classical
STAP.
To conclude it can be seen, that improvement is possible, but automatic procedures are
necessary to find ∆ parameter, as discussed in section 4.2. It the parameter is poorly estimated
results are much worse.
4.4.4 Results for TDD STAP detector with automatic ∆ finding.
As it was shown previously, it is necessary to appropriately choose ∆ parameter. In order to

do this I postulate to employ method presented in Fig. 4.8 and 4.10. Results of this approach
were already published in [23] and [24].
In Fig. 4.27 we can see results of automatic ∆ finding under assumption, that deltas
strength is equal (see Fig. 4.7) and noise is generated using TDD as a characteristic PDF
(see section 2.5 and 4.3.3). Automatic procedure properly choses the ∆ parameter, and there
is an improvement in detector performance. In this case detector is appropriately chosen for
the noise in the framework of SIRP theory. Real CPDF is exactly the same as CPDF assumed
in TDD STAP detector. We cannot have better detector in this model.
Situation is different if we use other type of noise. In such a case, TDD STAP detector is
only an approximation of a real GLRT detector. In Fig. 4.28 similar results are presented for
the K-distributed noise. We can see again some slight improvement of TDD STAP detector
in comparison to classical STAP. This time however we can expect, that there exists better
detector than TDD STAP. This is due to the fact, that in this case real CPDF is continuous,
and in TDD STAP, I assume discrete CPDF. Nevertheless, TDD STAP detector proves, to
be better than classical STAP, and there is a possibility for further improvement. This can
be achieved by better approximating CPDF.
The last figure (4.29) presents results of automatic a, b and q finding for K-distributed
noise and unequal Dirac deltas as described in section 4.2 and depicted in Fig. 4.10. We can
see that in comparison to Fig. 4.28 there is a slight improvement. This is due to the better
approximation of real CPDF of SIRP by unequal-strength deltas than by equal deltas, as a
result of additional degree of freedom. Having two Dirac deltas with unequal strength we can
better approximate distributions with skewness. In such a case, Dirac delta placed in point
a (see Fig. 4.9) should be stronger than the other (in point b). This way it is possible to
better approximate skewed distributions. In fact, because τ is greater than 0 and potentially
continuous and unlimited, all considered distributions (CPDFs) will be skewed.
Following this path we can expect further improvement when using for example more
Dirac-deltas. Advantage of having additional degree of freedom can be outweighted by the
necessity of estimating more parameters. This can be difficult to perform, and poorly esti-
mated parameters can lead to detection losses.
For high probabilities of detection we can see, that behavior of TDD STAP is slightly
worse than classical STAP. Nevertheless this is in the area of high probabilities of false
alarms (mean number of false alarms per image more than 1). Usually radars are working in
areas with lower levels of false alarms. As a conclusion we can say that automatic procedure,
presented in section 4.2, works well.
Figure 4.27 — Automatic ∆ finding for TDD noise.
Figure 4.28 — Automatic ∆ finding for K-distributed noise.

Figure 4.29 — Automatic q, a and b finding for K-distributed noise.
4.5 Conclusions.
In this chapter I have presented a concept of TDD STAP detector. This detector can better
fit sea clutter than traditional STAP algorithm. In chapter 3 we have seen, that sea clutter
has different statistical properties than those assumed in classical STAP detection schema.
Therefore GLRT from section 2.6 was employed. I resolved the problem with its practical
use in section 4.2 (this chapter). In next sections, simulation method was presented, that was
later used in evaluating TDD STAP detector performance. In section 4.4.1 it was shown, that
there is a performance decrease when classical STAP algorithm is working in non-Gaussian
environment. The use of TDD STAP detector can bring some improvements, which was shown
in section 4.4.3. However this improvement can be outweighted by badly chosen ∆ parameter.
Therefore in section 4.4.4, I postulated an automatic procedure. It is clear that automated
procedures can deal with the problem, and there is a performance improvement clearly visible
in characteristics presented in figures.
The future improvement in this area seems possible. We can imagine more Dirac-deltas
as a better approximation of characteristic PDF (under the limitations discussed in section
4.4.4). This can lead to better detectors, able to deal with a larger class of non-Gaussianity.
5
CHAPTER
HF radar signals
experiments and STAP
technique modifications.
High Frequency (HF) radar systems, which operate in frequency range between 3 and 30
MHz, have a potential to detect targets which are located beyond optical horizon on the
sea surface (Over The Horizon visibility - OTH). Therefore, in recent years, more and more
attention has been paid to such a systems in the context of the ship traffic surveillance in the
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), that was established by United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea in 1982. Such a trials were already undertaken and described for example in
[1] [13] [18] [19] [15] [16] [17] [14] [26]. In this chapter experiments, concerning real data from
HF radar system WERA, will be described. In particular two techniques will be presented.
First one is AMTI (purely temporal adaptive filtering), and the second is STAP that has
been theoretically described in section 2.2. The aim of the chapter is to present the problem
and the solution to non-stationarity. Comparison between AMTI and STAP is of secondary
importance. In the case of HF radar, there is no problem with non-Gaussianity. On the other
hand there is a problem with strong clutter and interference as was emphasized in section
3.2. It will be shown what new problems are to be faced in real-data implementation. Because
of the difficulties with covariance matrix estimation (see sec 2.2.6), sometimes it is possible
to obtain better results using Adaptive MTI. Because of these practical problems, classical
algorithms must be adapted, which will be also shown in this chapter. In the section 5.1 I will
introduce WERA radar system that was used in experiments. WERA system was designed
to operate as an oceanographics system, therefore this application will also be described in
the same section. Sections 5.2 will show how AMTI and STAP algorithm must be adapted to
WERA radar system design. Finally, in section 5.3 results of traffic survey will be presented.
5.1 WERA radar system.
Data were collected from the WERA [30] [29] HF radar system. Installation that was used
in experiments is a property of the French Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la
Marine (SHOM) and is operated by the company SAS ActiMar. System’s primary task is to
provide real-time, continuous data collection about currents and waves in the area of Brest
Gulf (Atlantic, west coast of France). In order to have unambiguous vectorial information of
the currents, full system consists of two radars displaced approximately 50 km apart (see Fig.
5.1).
Each radar consists of 16 line-aligned receiving antennas separated by approximately
CHAPTER 5. HF RADAR SIGNALS EXPERIMENTS AND STAP TECHNIQUE
MODIFICATIONS. 77
Figure 5.1 — Radars displacement (Google Earth).
Figure 5.2 — Receiving antenna array.
9.3 m (Fig. 5.2). Transmitting array consists of 4, square arranged, antennas (Fig. 5.3).
Signals from receiving antennas are independently sampled for digital beamforming and
storage for off-line processing. Transmitted waveform is FMCW, therefore it is necessary
to perform preprocessing in range to obtain data equivalent to pulsed systems described in
section 2.2.5. This is necessary to apply algorithm like AMTI or STAP (see section 2.2). To
achieve this goal, signal must be demodulated. The next step is to apply appropriate low pass
filter. Signal must be then sampled with Nyquist frequency. Such raw data have to be range
MODIFICATIONS. 78
Figure 5.3 — Transmitting antenna array.
processed. In the case of frequency modulated signals this means simply to perform Fast
Fourier Transform (FFT). After this operation the data can be presented as a complex data
cube (Fig. 2.19 in section 2.2.5) appropriate for AMTI or STAP processing. More detailed
explanation can be found in Appendix C. WERA chirp duration can vary from 0.2275 s to
0.26 s. Carrier frequency of the system is around 12 MHz. Bandwidth is set independently to
achieve desired range resolution (from 0.4 km to 1.5 km). Data file consists of complex samples
taken from 2048 coherent chirps (532.48 s) for 120 to 256 range cells by 16 separate channels
of array antenna. The number of range cells depends on the range resolution. For example for
0.4 km of range resolution, data file consists of 240 range cells which gives maximum range 96
km. For 1.2 km of range resolution, data are taken for 120 range cells, which gives maximum
range 144 km.
This configuration allows to cover area presented in Fig. 5.4 (for the 96 km maximum
range mode).
Data used in experiments for target detection were collected in July 2007. Additionally,
it was possible to obtain Automatic Identification System (AIS) data, concerning ship traffic
around Brest Gulf. From AIS data it was possible to obtain information about trajectories
of certain ships together with additional information e.g. MMSI number, IMO number, ship
length, draft etc (see Fig. 5.5). AIS data allowed to compare HF detections against the true
data.
HF radar systems have a long history as an ocean monitoring systems. They proved to be
capable of extracting currents speed and direction as well as sea state and wind information.
Bragg scattering from ocean waves (first described in [11]) plays a crucial role in this process.
Possibility of employing HF radar system to ocean monitoring is presented in more detail for
example in [5] [40] [30] [29].
WERA radar system was designed for the same purpose. In the first stage of its processing
it uses classical beamforming and Doppler processing (by Fast Fourier Transform - FFT).
Beamforming uses 16 signals from different antennas. The next step is Doppler processing.
Doppler processing is performed in a little bit complicated manner. At the beginning 13
spectra are calculated, each using overlapping sets of 512 samples (chirps). Chirps used to
calculate each spectrum are accordingly: number 1-512, 129-640, 257-768, ... , 1537-2048.
MODIFICATIONS. 79
Figure 5.4 — Coverage area of radars.
Figure 5.5 — AIS trajectories.

MODIFICATIONS. 80
Figure 5.6 — Single subband after beam-Doppler processing.
After this operation all 13 spectra are incoherently added (ie. summation of the magnitude)
in order to obtain 512 Doppler bands. A typical X-Y image of an area surveilled by the radar
for a single Doppler band is presented in Fig. 5.6.
After appropriate analysis, it is possible to obtain oceanographical information. In Fig.
5.7 we can see current map obtain from WERA system. Fig. 5.8 presents waves map and Fig.
5.9 wind information.
5.2 Implementation of Adaptive MTI and STAP - covariance

matrix estimation problem.
In this section, the application of Adaptive MTI and STAP processing to WERA radar data
will be described. The main problem of both techniques is to estimate covariance matrix.
Usually covariance matrix is calculated using auxiliary range cells. Unfortunately for WERA
radar system overall number of range cells is at most 256. The first step for both techniques
is data trim. From the 2048 chirps in data file, only J chirps of interest are chosen for further
processing (see Fig. 5.10). Number of chirps J is chosen in order to operate on data more
effectively and is not important from theoretical point of view. From this point data for AMTI
and STAP are processed differently.
5.2.1 Adaptive MTI implementation
The theoretical description of AMTI can be found in section 2.2.4). The first step of AMTI
is beamforming (Fig. 2.20 in section 2.2.4).
Beamforming is performed using 16 antennas for discrete angles [−60o ,+60o ,2o ] (Fig.
5.11).
After this step data are available as a cube with 61 beams instead of 16 antennas (Fig.
MODIFICATIONS. 81
Figure 5.7 — Current map (ActiMar).

MODIFICATIONS. 82
Figure 5.8 — Waves map (ActiMar).

MODIFICATIONS. 83
Figure 5.9 — Wind map (ActiMar).

MODIFICATIONS. 84
Figure 5.10 — Data trim.
Figure 5.11 — Angle Coverage.

MODIFICATIONS. 85
Figure 5.12 — Data snapshot.
Figure 5.13 — Test snapshot and training area.
2.20 and 2.21). For each range-beam cell, adaptive filter is calculated as described in section
2.2.4. Sample covariance matrix was calculated using auxiliary snapshots of the same beam.
Since in WERA there are at most 256 range cells I decided to use time spread of the data
to estimate covariance matrix. In Fig. 5.13 we can see test snapshot and area that auxiliary
snapshots were taken from. Auxiliary snapshots were taken by sliding snapshot window over
chirps and ranges in the test area. Training areas were separated in range from test snapshot
by guard cells. This prevents target self-nulling. Steering was performed for discrete velocities
[−10 m/s,+10 m/s,0.2 m/s].
After such a processing, results are available in the form of the test statistics cube (range ×
velocity × angle). It is not possible to present it directly. It is necessary to cut this cube across
one dimension. In Fig. 5.14 we can see example of a target visible after AMTI processing.
Test statistic is presented as an image for the specific range. 6 images present target that is
moving away from the radar, this is why echo is present in different range cells. Processing
was performed using 48 chirps (N=48).
MODIFICATIONS. 86
Figure 5.14 — Example of a target visible after AMTI processing.

MODIFICATIONS. 87
Figure 5.15 — Test snapshot and training area for STAP processing.
5.2.2 STAP implementation.
Fully adaptive STAP is operating on data before beamforming (suboptimum techniques were
not considered in this work), but after data trim (Fig. 5.10). STAP algorithm is applied to
each range cell separately to obtain test statistics as in section 2.2.5 - see equation (2.14).
Covariance matrix must be calculated from secondary (training) data. Clutter covariance
matrix was estimated using similar schema as for AMTI. In comparison to AMTI, STAP has
a potential to suppress clutter and interference at the same time. When interference cannot be
estimated independently from the clutter (because of coupling azimuth-Doppler), adaptive
single-domain methods may perform poorly and joint domain (space and time) adaptive
processing may be advantageous [18]. However this effect can be outweighted by the problem
of covariance matrix estimation. Classical schema for estimating covariance matrix fails to
work because in WERA system there are at most 256 range cells whereas in the case of STAP
processing it is necessary to estimate covariance matrix of a very high dimension (eg. 1600 ×
1600 in the case of STAP for 16 antennas and 100 chirps). Therefore it is necessary to find
more auxiliary snapshots. I decided (similarly as for AMTI) to use time spread of the data
to obtain more snapshots. I use overlapping sliding snapshots.
In Fig. 5.15 we can see test snapshot, training snapshot and training areas in the data
cube (compare with Fig. 5.13). After STAP processing, the test statistics is available in the
same form as for AMTI (test statistics cube: range × velocity × angle).
For both techniques there is possibility to chose certain parameters of covariance matrix
estimation. First one is the number of guard cells. Guard cells are necessary to avoid target
self-nulling. Usually 2 or 3 guard cells on both sides of test cell is sufficient to avoid this effect.
The next parameter to chose is range spread. Covariance matrix converges with increasing
number of auxiliary range cells. Unfortunately there is also a risk of clutter non-homogeneity.
Moreover having wide range-spread means high probability of other targets falling into clutter
covariance estimation area. The last parameter is time spread. Extending time spread allows
us to estimate covariance matrix in the situation, when there is not enough range cells to
do this. Unfortunately covariance matrix estimate converges slowly with extending time-
spread. Moreover there is a risk of clutter non-stationarity that will degrade covariance matrix
MODIFICATIONS. 88
Figure 5.16 — Targets localization.
estimation.
We can see that playing with these three parameters may be a crucial problem in appli-
cation both AMTI and STAP. Results of such experiments will be shown in next sections of
this chapter.
5.3 Comparisons between the results of AMTI and STAP
In this section I will compare AMTI and STAP techniques. It will be shown how both algo-
rithms can cope with the interference and clutter in order to reveal targets.
5.3.1 Data file and target description.
In experiments two data files from 19 July 2007 were used. One file contains recording from
Brezzelec site and the other from Garchine. Recording started at 05:20 UTC and its duration
was almost 8 min (2048 chirps, single chirp duration 0.2275 s). Bandwidth was set 375 MHz,
which gave range resolution 0.4 km. Transmitted power was 30 W. Files contain samples for
240 range cells, which gave maximum range 96 km. Significant wave height at the moment
of data collection was approximately 1.3 m.
From AIS data I chose two interesting potential targets shown in Fig. 5.16. EERLAND 26
is a small tug ship 25 m long (Fig. 5.17), L’AR VOALEDEN is a fishery boat 23 m long (Fig.
5.18). We will compare AMTI and STAP techniques for both targets and both localizations
(Garchine and Brezzelec).
In Fig. 5.19 we can see Garchine data file after classical beamforming. We can see a strong
radio interference from the same direction as fishery boat. This will definitely have a negative
influence on detection possibilities.
MODIFICATIONS. 89
Figure 5.17 — Tug ship.
Figure 5.18 — Fishery boat.
5.3.2 Detection of the tug ship from Garchine radar site.
In this subsection I will present results of the processing in order to reveal the tug ship using
data from Garchine localization. From AIS data it is possible to deduce, that target should
be present in the range cell number 158 (distance 63 km) and in the beam number 25 (-10
degrees left to the normal to the antenna). Indeed, in Fig. 5.20 target is well visible. This
figure presents test statistics (in decibels) for range cell number 158 and beam 25.
Fig. 5.20 presents behavior of AMTI and STAP algorithms for different integration times
and for different training samples support. Upper-left graph presents comparison between
lower (100 chirps) and higher (200 chirps) integration time AMTI with low training samples
support. In this case, 100 time slides and 15 range cells on both sides of test cell (see Fig.
5.13) were used for training. This gives total number of 3000 training snapshots. 0 dB in the
figure denotes the reference level of detected target. We can see, that the highest non-target
peak for 200 chirps AMTI is 6 dB lower than for 100 chirps AMTI. We can say, that in this
case 200 chirps AMTI outperforms 100 chirps AMTI by 6 dB. The lower-left graph presents
MODIFICATIONS. 90
Figure 5.19 — Interference.
similar results for high training samples support. In this case 200 slides and 60 range cells on
both sides of test cell are used. This gives 24000 samples used to estimate covariance matrix.
We can see that improvement is even better and 200 chirps AMTI outperforms 100 chirps
AMTI by 8 dB. Right graphs show similar results for STAP. For low training samples support
(upper-right) we can see that only 100 chirps STAP can reveal the target. 200 chirps STAP
fails to detect the target. Situation is different for high training samples support (lower-right
in Fig. 5.20). This time we can see, that 200 chirps STAP outperforms 100 chirps STAP by
5 dB.
In Fig. 5.21 we can see comparison between AMTI and STAP. Upper-left graph presents
comparison between AMTI ans STAP for shorter integration time (100 chirps) and low num-
ber of training samples. We can see, that in this case AMTI outperforms STAP by 8 dB.
Situation changes dramatically with high number of training samples. In this case, STAP out-
performs AMTI by 5 dB. For longer integration time (200 chirps) and low number of training
samples we can see, that STAP fails, whereas AMTI can reveal the target (see upper-right
graph of Fig. 5.21). For high number of training samples, STAP outperforms AMTI by 3 dB.
In figures from 5.22 to 5.25 we can see the influence of different training schemes on
detection possibilities. General pattern is clear that more training samples gives better chances
of target detection. This is valid for extending training area in time (100 vs 200 slides) as
well as in range (from 15 to 60 range cells on both sides of test cell). Generally, it is possible
to conclude that:
• AMTI works well even for relatively low number of training samples (100 slides, 15 range
cells on both sides of test cell).
• STAP needs more training samples (200 slides and 60 range cells on both sides of test
cell).
• Using both techniques it is possible to detect tug ship.
• Because of interferences present in the data file, STAP techniques gives slightly better
results.
MODIFICATIONS. 91
Figure 5.20 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - influence of integration time. Upper-
left: AMTI for low training samples support, lower-left: AMTI for high training samples
support, upper-right: STAP for low training samples support, lower-right: STAP for high
training samples support.
5.3.3 Detection of the tug ship from Brezzelec radar site.
The same target is visible from the second radar site (Brezzelec). From AIS data we can
expect target in the range cell number 160 (distance 64 km) and in the beam number 34
(6 degrees right to the normal to the antenna). Indeed, in Fig. 5.26 target is visible. In the
case of Bezzelec file, there are almost no interferences present. This should mean, that main
advantage of STAP will not play a role here.
First, let us compare the influence of integration time as before. We can see, that pattern
is similar as for Garchine file (Fig. 5.26). For longer integration time, target is better visible.
If we compare AMTI and STAP (5.27), we can see that:
• There is no advantage of STAP.
• For longer integration time (200 chirps), STAP gives the same result.
MODIFICATIONS. 92
Figure 5.21 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - comparison between AMTI and
STAP.
• For shorter integration time (100 chirps) AMTI better reveals the target (I could not
explain this anomaly).
5.3.4 Detection of the fishery ship from Garchine radar site.
The second target to detect was the fishery ship L’Ar Voaleden. Unfortunately strong inter-
ference was present in the same beam as the target. In figure 5.28 we can see a PPI image
after beamforming. It is well visible, that interference covers the area where target is present.
Interference was so strong that, using similar techniques as for tug ship, it was impossible to
detect this target. Exemplary image is presented in figure 5.29. This is PPI image (range-
azimuth). PPI image is produced by taking maximum value of test statistics from all test
velocities for range-azimuth cell of interest.
MODIFICATIONS. 93
Figure 5.22 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - different range support for AMTI
with 100 chirps.
MODIFICATIONS. 94
Figure 5.23 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - different range support for AMTI
with 200 chirps.
MODIFICATIONS. 95
Figure 5.24 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - different range support for STAP
with 100 chirps.
MODIFICATIONS. 96
Figure 5.25 — Tug ship detection from Garchine site - different range support for STAP
with 200 chirps.
MODIFICATIONS. 97
Figure 5.26 — Tug ship detection from Brezzelec site - influence of integration time. Upper-
left: AMTI for low training samples support, lower-left: AMTI for high training samples
support, upper-right: STAP for low training samples support, lower-right: STAP for high
training samples support.
5.3.5 Detection of the fishery ship from Brezzelec radar site.
The same fishery ship should be visible from the second radar site (Brezzelec). Similar experi-
ments were performed to detect this target. From AIS data it was possible to extract position
and velocity information of the target. Fishery boat was going almost directly toward the
Brezzelec radar site at the speed of about 10 knots (this is 5 m/s). To understand possibilities
of this detection it is necessary to calculate Bragg line Doppler speed. From chapter 3.2 we
know, that Bragg Doppler frequency (f ) is around 0,38 Hz for 12 MHz radar. Let us recall,
that f = 2V /λ, where V is a speed and λ is radar wavelength (around 28 m for 12 MHz
carrier frequency). From mentioned expression we can derive, that Bragg lines (ocean waves)
speed is around 4.9 to 5.1 m/s. We can see, that this is exactly the radial speed of our target.
This will make detection very difficult. Generally we should try to have very long integration
times in order to achieve Doppler resolution allowing to separate target from Bragg lines.
On the other hand it is difficult to estimate covariance matrix for long integration times. For
MODIFICATIONS. 98
Figure 5.27 — Tug ship detection from Brezzelec site - comparison between AMTI and
STAP.
example it is hard to achieve STAP for longer than 200 chirps and AMTI for longer than 500
chirps. Moreover, having very long integration time we can face the situation, that target is
no longer time-coherent. For example, target can change range speed, orientation etc. In Fig.
5.30 and 5.31 we can see a PPI image (range-azimuth) that is produced by taking maximum
value of test statistics from all test velocities for range-azimuth cell of interest. It seems that
fishery boat is not revealed by STAP, but is revealed by AMTI. This is not true. In fact
neither AMTI nor STAP can reveal this target. In the case of AMTI this is false alarm, that
disappears with time. Moreover this seeming detection for AMTI indicates radial velocity
which is negative, whereas fishery boat is in fact approaching radar.
We can conclude, that for the target with the radial velocity equal to Bragg line Doppler
velocity, detection possibilities are very poor.
MODIFICATIONS. 99
Figure 5.28 — Strong interference present in the target beam.
Figure 5.29 — PPI image after AMTI processing for 200 chirps.
MODIFICATIONS. 100
Figure 5.30 — PPI image after AMTI processing for 200 chirps.
Figure 5.31 — PPI image after STAP processing for 100 chirps.
5.4 Thresholding and detections presentation.
In sections before, it was shown how AMTI and STAP techniques can reveal the target in
the terms of test statistics. In a complete system, the last step it to apply thresholding for
the detections (see section 2.2.5, 2.3 and chapter 4). Choosing appropriate threshold is a
very important issue, that is not treated in this work. Instead, I will present some detection
results for a priori chosen threshold. In figures 5.32 and 5.33 we can see PPI images after
thresholding. I used AMTI algorithm for 200 chirps and low number of training samples.
This was due to the computational reasons. After AMTI processing, test statistics cube was
reduced to test statistics image by taking (for each range-beam cell) maximum across all
velocities. The last step was to apply threshold. We can see that some targets were detected,
but there are still some undetected targets. We can also see some false alarms, that are mostly
related to the presence of islands and rocks as well as to the sidelobes of strong echo from
target. Processing after thresholding is also very important, that is not treated in this work.
MODIFICATIONS. 101
Figure 5.32 — PPI images 05:20-05:22.
Tracking can reduce number of false alarms considerably (see for example [1] and [13]).
To reduce sidelobe false detections it is worth considering to use dominant scatter removal.
Knowledge aided techniques could be used to remove false detections from islands and rocks.
Finally, simultaneous processing from two radars, after thresholding, can also reduce the
number of false alarms as well as give additional vectorial information about target velocity.
Thresholding for other techniques (AMTI with longer integration time and STAP) was
not performed from computational reasons, but it should give better results (lower number
of false alarms).
5.5 Conclusions.
In this chapter a practical implementation of AMTI and STAP techniques was shown. We
could see that:
MODIFICATIONS. 102
Figure 5.33 — PPI images 05:24-05:26.

MODIFICATIONS. 103
• AMTI and STAP techniques can reveal quite small ships even 60 km away from the
shore.
• Longer-distance detections are difficult because of the very low transmitting power of
WERA radar system (only 30 W).
• In the case of the presence of a strong interference, STAP technique seems to be more
effective than AMTI.
• On the other hand, AMTI performance is good enough when very little interference is
present. Moreover AMTI is less computational and training data demanding. This may
be an important factor.
There are however some other possibilities to improve STAP calculations, that were not
considered in this work, for example:
• Parametric adaptive methods.
• Diagonal loading.
• Reduced-rank STAP.
Nevertheless, both techniques failed to detect target that is buried completely in interference
or having the same speed as the Bragg waves. In this chapter, only two targets were considered
as an example of detections. In fact, during experiments many other targets were detected
successfully. Generally we can conclude, that bigger ships (eg. 100 m) are well visible using
both AMTI and STAP even at longer distances (100 km).
Tu summarize we can say that for HF radar the rationale standing behind using STAP
is second order Bragg effects (azimuth-Doppler coupling of the clutter) plus interferences
(jamming). In the case of a simple first order Bragg clutter plus interferences, adaptive arrays
followed by adaptive temporal filtering may be sufficient. Second order Bragg scattering makes
STAP prevail over AMTI. Either way, STAP prevails over AMTI when interference is present
together with clutter.
It is worth to reconsider radar waveforms used in HF radars. WERA radar was designed
to provide information about waves and currents. For target detection it may be profitable,
to change some radar parameters such as transmitted power, or chirp repetition frequency.
For example for low chirp repetition frequency, all fast targets fall into false Doppler cell of
a slow target. Therefore an airplane or a very fast speed boats can be detected with false
velocity.
It seems that HF radar systems have a potential to improve target detections at long
distances that is not yet sufficiently explored. In order to achieve this, it is also necessary to
perform analysis on the influence of meteorological conditions. For example sea state can be
a crucial factor when detecting targets.
6
CHAPTER
Conclusions and
perspectives
In this work it was shown how classical STAP concept can be adapted to the sea surveillance.
Two main problems were addressed. First one is non-Gaussianity of the clutter and the second
is covariance matrix estimation.
In the first chapter basic concepts were introduced. Classical STAP algorithm was shown
as well as Adaptive MTI processing. Detection theory was also presented in order to have
a good base to develop other detectors. In order to show potential detection difficulties, sea
clutter properties were presented in chapter 3. We could sea, that for see clutter we can expect
non-Gaussianity, Doppler clutter related do Bragg scattering and clutter non-stationarity.
These problems were addressed in chapters 4 and 5.
Two Dirac Delta (TDD STAP) detector was presented in chapter 4 as a solution to
the problem of non-Gaussianity. It was shown, that indeed, this detector can give some
improvement in the case of non-Gaussian clutter. There is a possibility to develop this concept
and introduce for example more Dirac deltas to further improve detections. There is, however,
a limit of improvement that is related to non-Gaussian distribution itself. This can be viewed
as an Cramér-Rao bound for the problem of detection.
In figure 6.1 I presented graphically three cases in the typical detection problems.
They are:
• Gaussianity
• Non-Gaussianity
• Determinism
Figure 6.1 — Triangle of detection problems.

CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES 105
Very often we are placed in between all of these cases. Typical detectors were developed
under assumption of Gaussian clutter and noise. This case is well studied. Its characteristic
feature is that in fact this is most random case. It means that this is a result of the law
of large numbers, where we have large number of independent contributors to overall effect.
From this point of view this is the worst case, because there is only strictly random pattern
and as such cannot be predicted precisely. On the other hand, in the case of determinism,
there is a perfect information about the process standing behind the clutter, and clutter can
be predicted (anticipated) and suppressed. This case can occur for very high resolution radars.
The third case is statistical non-Gaussian distribution. This is very difficult situation. In fact
this may occur in the situations that are in the middle between Gaussian and deterministic
case (middle resolution radars). We cannot apply imaging algorithms and classical (Gaussian)
algorithms fail in the sense, that they produce more false alarms. This is the case, when new
algorithms must be developed, that can cope with non-Gaussianity. Even then, because of
distribution imminent properties, usually, performance will be worse than classical algorithms
working under Gaussian noise and clutter.
In this work it was proved, that under non-Gaussian K-distributed clutter there is a
possibility to improve detection in comparison to classical STAP algorithms using a new
concept of Two Dirac Delta detector. To validate results, simulated data were used in chapter
4.3.
To test adaptive methods on real data, WERA radar system was used in chapter 5. The
main problem in practical application was the way the covariance matrix should be estimated.
I presented sliding window method. Because of low number of range cells in WERA radar
system as well as clutter nonstationarity it was necessary to precisely chose certain algorithm
parameters. STAP algorithm was tested together with Adaptive MTI. It was proved, that
indeed, both STAP and AMTI are effective algorithms in canceling clutter and interferences.
It was shown, that having clutter covariance matrix well calculated STAP outperforms AMTI
when clutter plus interference is present in the data. Nevertheless, in the case of underesti-
mated covariance matrix, this advantage can vanish.
To conclude we can say, that STAP technique can be an effective algorithm to detect
targets on the sea surface, and this work give certain solutions to some problems with its
practical application.
The future work should concentrate on:
• Testing algorithm under different sea state and weather conditions.
• Developing concept of TDD STAP detector by introducing more Dirac deltas.
• Applying techniques like reduced-rank STAP, knowledge aided algorithms, dominating

scatterer removal and diagonal loading.
• Applying tracking algorithms after signal processing.
These improvements should reduce number of false alarms and false tracks considerably.
A
APPENDIX
Gaussian complex
process.
In this appendix, it will be presented transformation that is commonly used in narrowband

systems, that allows to employ compact complex notation instead of classical real-numbers
notation. This notation is used in the rest of this PhD thesis, and therefore it is necessary to
present it in an appendix.
Let us assume Gaussian N-dimensional process. Let us split random, N dimensional vector
(N is even) into vectors x and y (both having dimension N/2 and zero mean value).
Now we have formula for a Gaussian process [44]:
· ¸
x
³· x ¸´ [xT yT ]M−1
1 y
p = p exp(− ) (A.1)
y (2Π)N/2 |M| 2
where M is a covariance matrix:

nh x i o
T T
M=E [x y ]
y
where || denotes determinant. For a narrowband Gaussian process, covariance matrix is of a

special form [44]:
· ¸
1 V −W
M=
2 W V
where WT = −W, and T denotes transposition.

Therefore we can easily apply transformation into complex domain [44]: Let
z = x + jy (A.2)
z is a N/2 dimensional complex vector. Let also
C = V + jW (A.3)
There are some interesting properties of this transformation:

· ¸· ¸
T T V −W x
[x y ] = zH Cz (A.4)
W V y
APPENDIX A. GAUSSIAN COMPLEX PROCESS. 107
· ¸−1 · ¸
T T V −W x
[x y ] = zH C−1 z (A.5)
W V y
So
· ¸
x
[xT yT ]M−1
y
= zH C−1 z (A.6)
2
Moreover
1
p(z) = exp(−zH C−1 z) (A.7)
ΠN/2 |C|
where H denotes transpose conjugate.
Additional properties: If z is a random complex Gaussian vector, A is a transformation
matrix and b is a vector such that:
s = Ax + b (A.8)
then
E(s) = AE(x) + b (A.9)
and
COV (s) = ACAH (A.10)
B
APPENDIX
Data generation.
In order to test performance of STAP, as described in chapter 4, we need to generate Gaussian

and SIRP vectors. To do this we will use this representation of a PDF (for real SIRP) [49]:
Z ∞
1 1 − X T M −1 X
f (X) = n/2 1/2 n
e 2σ 2 dGσ (σ) (B.1)
(2π) |M | 0 σ
where X is a Spherically Invariant Random Vector (SIRV) and T denotes transpose. If

E(σ 2 ) = 1 then M = E[XX T ]. We will be using continuous version:
Z ∞
1 1 − X T M −1 X
f (X) = e 2σ 2 g(σ)dσ (B.2)
(2π)n/2 |M |1/2 0 σ n
SIRV has a, very useful property [49]: If X is a SIRV with characteristic PDF g(σ), then
Y = AX + b (B.3)
is also SIRV with the same characteristic PDF.It is assumed that A is a matrix such that
AAT = Σ and b is a known vector having the same dimension as X. If X is a zero mean
Gaussian vector with identity covariance matrix, then covariance matrix of Y = E(Y Y T ) =
Σ. So general algorithm looks as follows [49]:
1. Generate a white zero mean Gaussian random vector Z, having identity covariance
matrix.
2. Generate a random variable v from the PDF g(v). Denote mean square value of v by a2 .
3. Normalize v to obtain σ: σ = v/a.
4. Generate product X = Zσ. At this step, we have a white SIRV having zero mean and
identity covariance matrix.
5. Perform linear transformation to obtain SIRV having desired mean value and
covariance matrix.
In radar detection problems we need to have complex samples. Therefore algorithm must be
modified. In Fig. B.1 exemplary histograms are shown.
APPENDIX B. DATA GENERATION. 109
Figure B.1 — Generated SIRVs histograms.

C
APPENDIX
Space Time Adaptive

Processing based on
Frequency Modulated
Continuous Wave
system.
C.1 Introduction.
The fundamental assumption that is made while space-time adaptive processing (STAP)
technique is considered is that the signal to be processed takes on the form of a sequence of
coherent pulses. Frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) systems are in widespread
use because of their numerous advantages, for example low transmitting power. It seems
extremely important to look for a possibility of using STAP procedures in FMCW systems
to make them even more attractive. The appendix presents a simple analysis of a proposed
approach to achieve this goal. A structure of the signal processor is presented and assumptions
necessary to be fulfilled are defined. Effects of the proposed approach implementation in HF,
I, and X bands are evaluated on the basis of selected parameters of the appropriate FMCW-
STAP systems. Derivations presented in this appendix were inspired by the work [4]. More
precisely, all results from section C.2 were published in [4], but without all step-by-step
transformations. Therefore, here I present a complete derivation.
C.2 Preliminaries.
Let us consider single receiving antenna system shown in Fig. C.1. In this document we
assume the following standard data set:
fc = 10 MHz
fdoppler ± 0.5 Hz
fr = PRF = 1 Hz → PRI = Tr = 1 s (C.1)
Doppler resolution = 0.02 Hz → TDWELL = 50 s
range resolution = 1.5 km → B = 100 kHz
APPENDIX C. SPACE TIME ADAPTIVE PROCESSING BASED ON FREQUENCY
MODULATED CONTINUOUS WAVE SYSTEM. 111
Figure C.1 — Single receiving antenna system.
Transmitted waveform (we assume here only one period from FMCW waveform, centered at
time zero):
vT (t) = cos[ωc t + πBfr t2 ] = cos[φT (t)] (C.2)
where −Tr /2 < t < +Tr /2
From above we can derive instantaneous frequency as:
1 dφT (t)
fT (t) = = fc + Bfr t (C.3)
2π dt
Let us consider a single target:
ν = 5 m/s
t = 0
R0 = 15km (C.4)
R(t) = R0 + νt = 15 km + 5 ms t
td = 2 R(t)
c
Received signal is both delayed in time (due to distance from radar to target) and shifted
in frequency (due to non-zero radial velocity). Frequency (over time) of transmitted and
received signal is shown in Fig. C.2. After mixing with transmitted signal, frequency over
time is shown in Fig. C.3. Mixing with transmitted signal is the same as subtracting the
phase. Therefore two frequencies f1 and f2 in Fig. C.3 are :
1 d
f1 = [φT (t − td ) − φT (t)] (C.5)
2π dt
1 d
f2 = [φT (t − td ) − φT (t + Tr )] (C.6)
2π dt
If f2 À f1 , than it is possible to filter out part of the signal having frequency f2 as shown in
Fig. C.4. Condition f2 À f1 is fulfilled if we assume that time delay td of echo from target
is much less than Tr (we keep in mind that T = Tr − td ). Therefore distance to the target is
bounded. This condition also imply that Tr > T À 21 Tr . Now it is possible to recenter each
pulse as shown in Fig. C.5. Following calculations assume only re-centered part of the mixed
Figure C.2 — Frequency over time of transmitted and received signal.
Figure C.3 — Received signal after mixer and low pass filter.
Figure C.4 — Signal after filtering out high frequency factor.
Figure C.5 — Demodulated pulse.

signal. Backing off to primitive echo from the target:
vR (t) = AvT (t − td ) = A cos[ωc (t − td ) + πBfr (t − td )2 ]

A h j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td )2 ] 2
i
= e + e−j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td ) ] (C.7)
2
After mixing, received signal is:
A h j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td )2 ] −j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td )2 ]
i
vb (t) = e +e ·
2
h
1 j[ωc t+πBfr t2 ] 2
i
e + e−j[ωc t+πBfr t ]
2
A h j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td )2 +ωc t+πBfr t2 ] 2 2
= e + e−j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td ) −ωc t−πBfr t ] +
4 i
2 −ω t−πBf t2 ] 2 +ω t+πBf t2 ]
ej[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td ) c r
+ e−j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td ) c r
(C.8)
Then signal is passed through a low-pass filter. After this operation only underlined terms in
(C.8) remain:
A h j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td )2 −ωc t−πBfr t2 ] 2 2
i
vl (t) = e + e−j[ωc (t−td )+πBfr (t−td ) −ωc t−πBfr t ]
4
A
= cos[ωc (t − td ) + πBfr (t − td )2 − ωc t − πBfr t2 ] (C.9)
2
Let us introduce
2R 2νti 2R0
td = c = t0 + c , t0 = c (C.10)
Then :
φ(ti ) = 2πfc (ti − td ) + πBfr (ti − td )2 − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i

= 2πfc ti − 2πfc td + πBfr (t2i − 2ti td + t2d ) − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i
= 2πfc ti − 2πfc td + πBfr t2i − 2πBfr ti td + πBfr t2d − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i
= −2πfc td − 2πBfr ti td + πBfr t2d
2νti 2νti ³ 2νti ´2
= −2πfc (t0 + ) − 2πBfr ti (t0 + ) + πBfr t0 +
c c c
2νti 2νt2i
= −2πfc t0 − 2πfc − 2πBfr ti t0 − 2πBfr
c c
2 2νti 2νti 2
+πBfr t0 + 2πBfr t0 + πBfr ( )
c c
ν
= [ − 2πfc t0 + πBfr t20 ] + 2π[ − 2fc
c
ν 2ν h νi
+2Bfr t0 − Bfr t0 ]ti − 2πB fr 1 − t2i (C.11)
c c c
For assumed set of data (eg. providing ν/c ¿ 1), during one pulse duration the quadratic
term and second part of the linear term may be neglected. Therefore we have:
2ν
φ(ti ) ≈ φ0 − 2π[ fc + Bfr t0 ]ti (C.12)
c
hence within the first pulse, frequency fI is
1 dφ(t) 2ν
fI = = fc + Bfr t0 (C.13)
2π dt c
As can be seen, this frequency offset consists of two terms: the first is due to target velocity
and the second is due to time delay (range) to the target. It is not possible to separate velocity
from range, analysing only one pulse. In our example for the target:
2ν 1
fc = Hz, Bfr t0 = 10 Hz (C.14)
c 3
similar analysis for the nth pulse:
2R 2ν 2R0
td = c = t0 + c (nTr + ti ) , t0 = c (C.15)
ti − is a time variable within one pulse duration (C.16)
φ(ti ) = 2πfc (ti − td ) + πBfr (ti − td )2 − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i

= 2πfc ti − 2πfc td + πBfr (t2i − 2ti td + t2d ) − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i
= 2πfc ti − 2πfc td + πBfr t2i − 2πBfr ti td + πBfr t2d − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i
= −2πfc td − 2πBfr ti td + πBfr t2d
2ν
= −2πfc [t0 + (nTr + ti )]
c
2ν
−2πBfr ti [t0 + (nTr + ti )]
c
h 2ν i2
+πBfr t0 + (nTr + ti )
c
2ν 2ν
= −2πfc t0 − 2πfc nTr − 2πfc ti
c c
2ν 2ν
−2πBfr ti t0 − 2πBfr ti nTr − 2πBfr ti ti
c c
h 2ν 4ν 2 i
2 2
+πBfr t0 + 2t0 (nTr + ti ) + 2 (nTr + ti )
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
h 2ν 2ν 4ν 2 i
+πBfr t20 + 2t0 nTr + 2t0 ti + 2 (n2 Tr2 + 2nTr ti + t2i )
c c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr t20 + πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 (n2 Tr2 + 2nTr ti + t2i )
c c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr t20 + πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 n2 Tr2
c c c
4ν 2 4ν 2 2
+πBfr 2 2nTr ti + πBfr 2 ti
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν 2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr t20 + πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 n2 Tr2
c c c
4ν 2 4ν 2 2
+πBfr 2 2nTr ti + πBfr 2 ti
c c
2ν 2ν
c c
2ν νh νi
−2πBfr ti t0 − 2πBfr ti nTr − 4πBfr 1 − t2i
c c c
2ν 2ν 4ν 2 4ν 2
+πBfr t20 + πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 n2 Tr2 + πBfr 2 2nTr ti
c c c c
2ν 2ν 2ν
= −2πfc t0 + πBfr t20 − 2πfc nTr − 2πfc ti − 2πBfr ti t0 − 2πBfr ti nTr
c c c
νh νi 2
−4πBfr 1 − ti
c c
2ν 2ν 4ν 2 4ν 2
+πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 n2 Tr2 + πBfr 2 2nTr ti
c c c c
2ν h 2ν 2ν i
2
= −2πfc t0 + πBfr t0 − 2πfc nTr − 2π fc + Bfr t0 + n B ti
h i c c c
ν ν 2
−4πBfr 1 − ti
c c
2ν 4ν 2 2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr 2t0 nTr + πBfr 2 n2 Tr2 + πBfr 2t0 ti + πBfr 2 2nTr ti
c c c c
2ν h 2ν 2ν i
= −2πfc t0 + πBfr t20 − 2πfc nTr − 2π fc + Bfr t0 + n B ti
c c c
νh νi 2
−4πBfr 1 − ti
c c
2ν 4ν 2
+πB2t0 n + πB 2 n2 Tr
c c
2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr 2t0 ti + πB 2 2nti (C.17)
c c
In order to neglect terms:
νh νi
−4πBfr 1 − t2i
c c
2ν 4ν 2 2
+πB2t0 n + πB 2 n Tr
c c
2ν 4ν 2
+πBfr 2t0 ti + πB 2 2nti (C.18)
c c
certain assumptions must be made:
1.
νh νi ³ 2ν
max
´ 1
4πBfr 1 − t2i ¿ 2π → B Tr ¿ 1
c c c 4
since max value of ti is 12 Tr
2.
2ν ³ 2R ´³ 2ν ´
max max
πB2t0 n ¿ 2π → B N ¿1
c c c
where N is a number of pulses and Rmax is a max range from the radar to the target
3.
4ν 2 2 1 ³ 2νmax ´2 2
πB n Tr ¿ 2π → B N Tr ¿ 1
c2 2 c
4.
2ν ³ 2R ´³ 2ν ´1
max max
πBfr 2t0 ti ¿ 2π → B ¿1
c c c 2
again we have to remember that max value of ti is 21 Tr and fr = 1
Tr . This condition is
weaker than (2.) since 21 ¿ N .
5.
4ν 2 1 ³ 2νmax ´2
πB 2nti ¿ 2π → B N Tr ¿ 1
c2 2 c
again max value of ti is 12 Tr and max value of n is N . This condition is weaker than (3.)
because N < N 2 .
So after simplifications based on conditions 1. 2. 3. we have:

2ν 2ν 2ν
φIn (ti ) = φ0 − 2nπfc Tr − 2π[ fc + Bfr t0 + n B]ti (C.19)
c c c
so
1 dφ(t) 2ν 2ν
fIn = = fc + Bfr t0 + n B (C.20)
2π dt c c
Let us perform Fourier transformation on the received (n-th) pulse (C.9) using (C.19)
Z T/2
VIn (f ) = A cos (φIn (t))e−j2πf t dt
−T/2
Z T/2
2ν
= A cos (φ0 − 2nπfc Tr − 2πfIn t)e−j2πf t dt
−T/2 c
Z T/2 µ ¶
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr −2πfIn t) −j(φ −2nπf 2ν
T −2πf t)
= e c +e 0 c c r In
e−j2πf t dt
−T/2 2
Z T/2 µ ¶
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr −2πfIn t−2πf t) −j2πf t
= e c e dt +
−T/2 2
Z T/2 µ ¶
A −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr −2πfIn t+2πf t) −j2πf t
e c e dt
−T/2 2
Z T/2
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr −2πfIn t−2πf t)
= e c dt +
−T/2 2
Z T/2
A −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr −2πfIn t+2πf t)
e c dt
−T/2 2
Z
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) T/2 j(−2πfIn t−2πf t)
= e c e dt +
2 −T/2
Z
A −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) T/2 −j(−2πfIn t+2πf t)
e c e dt
2 −T/2
Figure C.6 — Spectrum of the received pulse.
Z T/2
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr )
= e c e−j(2πfIn t+2πf t) dt +
2 −T/2
Z T/2
A −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr )
e c e−j(2πf t−2πfIn t) dt
2 −T/2
A j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) 2 sin [2π(fIn + f )T /2] A −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) 2 sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2]
= e c + e c
2 2π(fIn + f ) 2 2π(f − fIn )
AT j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) 2 sin [2π(fIn + f )T /2] AT −j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) 2 sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2]
= e c + e c
2 2π(fIn + f )T 2 2π(f − fIn )T
AT h j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) 2 sin [2π(fIn + f )T /2] 2ν 2 sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2] i
= e c + e−j(φ0 −2nπfc c Tr )
2 2π(fIn + f )T 2π(f − fIn )T
h
AT j(φ0 −2nπfc 2ν Tr ) sin [2π(fIn + f )T /2] 2ν sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2] i
= e c + e−j(φ0 −2nπfc c Tr )
2 2π(fIn + f )T /2 2π(f − fIn )T /2
AT h jφ0 −j2nπfc 2ν Tr sin [2π(f + fIn )T /2] 2ν sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2] i
= e c + e−jφ0 +j2nπfc c Tr
2 2π(f + fIn )T /2 2π(f − fIn )T /2
h
AT jφ0 −j2πfc 2ν nTr sin [2π(f + fIn )T /2] 2ν sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2] i
= e c + e−jφ0 +j2πfc c nTr
2 2π(f + fIn )T /2 2π(f − fIn )T /2
(C.21)
Let us investigate (C.21). Considering only positive frequencies, maximum of (C.21) is in point
f = fIn , and fIn is related to the distance to the target (see (C.20) and (C.10)). Therefore
distance to the target can be read from the spectrum of the received signal as can be seen
in Fig. C.6 (this is true as long as 2ν 2ν
c fc and n c B are much less than Bfr t0 , eg. (C.14)). We
sin [2π(f ±f )T /2]
see that from pulse to pulse, two parameters can change: fIn in 2π(f ±fInIn)T /2 and nTr in
2ν
e±jφ0 ∓j2πfc c nTr . For standard data set, over dwelling time (50 s) fIn changes only slightly,
sin [2π(f ±f )T /2]
hence 2π(f ±fInIn)T /2 can be interpreted as function of f only (let say K(f )). Taking into
account only positive frequencies we can neglect term
2ν sin [2π(f + fIn )T /2]
ejφ0 −j2πfc c
nTr
2π(f + fIn )T /2
Therefore we have the following approximation:
2ν
VIn (f ) ≈ K(f )e−jφ0 +j2πfc c
nTr
(C.22)
Including e−jφ0 in K(f ) leads to:

2ν
VIn (f ) = K(f )ej2πfc c
nTr
(C.23)
We can see that for the specific range (which means frequency f ) from pulse to pulse only
2ν
term ej2πfc c nTr changes. Assumptions are summarized in the table C.1.
Table C.1 — Assumptions.
2Rmax
T À 12 Tr → 12 Tr À c → Rmax ¿ 14 Tr c range limitation
³ ´
B 2νmax
c Tr 14 ¿ 1 1.
³ ´³ ´
B 2Rcmax 2νmax
c N ¿1 2.
³ ´2
1 2νmax
2B c N 2 Tr ¿ 1 3.
νmax N Tr ¿ 4R 4R − range resolution,

no range migration condition
dν
dt N Tr ¿ 4ν 4ν − velocity resolution,
no velocity migration condition
2νmax
c fc ¿ Bfr t0 → νmax fBc Tr ¿ Rmin t0 = 2Rcmin
violation of this condition leads
to range errors which can be
mitigated after Doppler
processing (not true for STAP)
N 2νmax
c B ¿ Bfr t0 → νmax N Tr ¿ Rmin t0 = 2Rcmin
this condition is weaker than condition
for the range migration
C.3 Antenna array with FMCW.

Lets perform similar calculations for multi-dimensional case (see Fig. C.7). Received signal,
coming from the target will be now expressed in similar way as in (C.7):
vmr (t) = Av(t − td − ta ) = A cos[ωc (t − td − ta ) + πBfr (t − td − ta )2 ]
Figure C.7 — System with antenna array.
Figure C.8 — Geometry of the target echo and antenna array.
2 2
Aej[ωc (t−td −ta )+πBfr (t−td −ta ) ] + Ae−j[ωc (t−td −ta )+πBfr (t−td −ta ) ]
=
2
A h j[ωc (t−td −ta )+πBfr (t−td −ta )2 ] 2
i
= e + e−j[ωc (t−td −ta )+πBfr (t−td −ta ) ]
2
(C.24)
where ta is an additional delay due to the distance between antenna elements. We assume
the first antenna as a reference antenna (see Fig. C.8). Subscript m denotes antenna element
(m = 1 . . . M). Time delay will be equal mdc sin(α), where d is a distance between antenna
elements and c is a speed of wave propagation. After low pass filter we have:
A
vml (t) = cos[ωc (t − td − ta ) + πBfr (t − td − ta )2 − ωc t − πBfr t2 ]
2
(C.25)
Let tboth = td + ta :
2νti md 2νti
tboth = t0 + + sin(α) = t00 + (C.26)
c c c
Now:
φm (ti ) = 2πfc (t − tboth ) + πBfr (t − tboth )2 − 2πfc ti − πBfr t2i

= −2πfc tboth − 2πBfr ti tboth + πBfr t2both

2 ν ν 2ν h νi
= [ − 2πfc t00 + πBfr t00 ] + 2π[ − 2fc + 2Bfr t00 − Bfr t00 ]ti − 2πB fr 1 − t2i
c c c c
(C.27)
Similar simplifications as before lead us to formulas as follows. Phase for single pulse:
md 2ν
φm (ti ) ≈ φ0 − 2πfc sin(α) − 2π[ fc + Bfr t00 ]ti (C.28)
c c
hence within the first pulse, instantaneous frequency fmI is
1 dφ(t) 2ν
fmI = = fc + Bfr t00 (C.29)
2π dt c
And for the for the nth pulse
md 2ν 2ν 2ν
φmIn (ti ) = φ0 − 2πfc sin(α) − 2nπfc Tr − 2π[ fc + Bfr t00 + n B]ti
c c c c
so
1 dφ(t) 2ν 2ν
fmIn = = fc + Bfr t00 + n B (C.30)
2π dt c c
After Fourier transformation:
Z T/2
VmIn (f ) = A cos (φmIn (t))e−j2πf t dt
−T/2
AT h jφ0 −j2πfc md sin(α)−j2πfc 2ν nTr sin [2π(f + fIn )T /2]
= e c c +
2 2π(f + fIn )T /2
md 2ν sin [2π(f − fIn )T /2] i
e−jφ0 +j2πfc c sin(α)+j2πfc c nTr
2π(f − fIn )T /2
(C.31)
Again for positive frequencies we have the following approximation:

md
sin(α)+j2πfc 2ν
VmIn (f ) ≈ K(f )e−jφ0 +j2πfc c c
nTr
(C.32)
Including e−jφ0 in K(f ) leads to:

md
sin(α)+j2πfc 2ν
VmIn (f ) = K(f )ej2πfc c c
nTr
md
sin(α) j2πfc 2ν
= K(f )ej2πfc c e c
nTr
(C.33)
We see that (C.33) changes (from pulse to pulse and between array elements) exactly in the
same way as it is assumed for STAP processing (see for example [37]).
C.4 STAP system using FMCW.

In this section digital processing will be explained. First we need to set cut-off frequency of the
low-pass filter. To get rid of frequency f2 (C.6) the cut-off frequency can be set B/2. Then
we are left with the signal as in the Figure C.9 (for clarity reasons transmitted sawtooth
waveform is also shown but on a different frequency scale). Now for N pulses we have to
Figure C.9 — Sampling after filtering.
Figure C.10 — Data cube.
separately perform L point FFT. Thus the sampling rate should be L/Tr . L should be set
that condition L/TR > 2fImax is fulfilled. fImax depends on the maximum range of the radar
system and on the range resolution since B is set to obtain desired range resolution. After
sampling and FFT we have L/2 samples for positive frequencies and L/2 samples for negative
frequencies (from which 2 are the same frequency-zero frequency). After this operation (for
each antenna array receiving element) we can arrange our complex samples into data cube:
M antenna elements * N pulses * L/2 range cells. This is the form accepted by digital STAP
processor (Fig. C.10) see for example [37].
C.5 FMCW HF system - practical example.
In this section we summarize practical considerations

fc = 10 MHz (C.34)
which gives:
λ = 30 m (C.35)
Let
B = 100 kHz → range resolution = 1.5 km (C.36)
Let max Doppler shift be:
m
fdoppler ± 0.5 Hz (Vmax < 7.5 ) (C.37)
s
Which gives:
fr = PRF = 2 ∗ 0.5 Hz = 1 Hz → PRI = Tr = 1 s (C.38)
We want to have:
Doppler resolution = 0.02 Hz → TDWELL = 50 s (C.39)
Now let us consider condition
f2 À f1 (C.40)
This implies that
1 1 2R
T À Tr → Tr À (C.41)
2 2 c
After calculations we have condition for the radar range
R ¿ 75 000 km (C.42)
Now we want to have a radar range 150 km. This means that fImax = 100 Hz. This is because
two way distance is 300 km which gives 1 ms time delay. Sawtooth signal changes within 100
kHz band during 1 s. So after 1 ms, frequency difference is 100 Hz. Our sampling rate should
be twice this number. After calculations we have L=200. Since FFT operates on samples
number equal power of 2, we can set L=256 (we will have 256 range cells). N will be 50 since
dwelling time is 50 s.
C.6 FMCW X-band system - practical example.

In this section similar considerations for X-band system are presented.
fc = 10 GHz (C.43)
which gives:
λ = 0.03 m (C.44)
Let
B = 1 MHz → range resolution = 150 m (C.45)
m
fdoppler ± 500 Hz (Vmax < 7.5 ) (C.46)
s
Which gives:
fr = PRF = 2 ∗ 500 Hz = 1 kHz → PRI = Tr = 1 ms (C.47)
We want to have:
Doppler resolution = 10 Hz → TDWELL = 0.1 s (C.48)
f2 À f1 (C.49)
This implies that
1 1 2R
2 2 c
R ¿ 75 km (C.51)
Additional calculations to verify assumptions (target at the range of 1 km and at the speed
of 5 m
s):
2ν 1
fc = kHz, Bfr t0 = 6 kHz (C.52)
c 3
If we put radar range 10 km we will have L > 120 (eg. 128), and N=100.
C.7 FMCW L-band system - practical example.

In this section are presented similar considerations for L-band system.
fc = 1 GHz (C.53)
which gives:
λ = 0.3 m (C.54)
Let
B = 1 MHz → range resolution = 150 m (C.55)
m
fdoppler ± 50 Hz (Vmax < 7.5 ) (C.56)
s
Which gives:
fr = PRF = 2 ∗ 50 Hz → PRI = Tr = 10 ms (C.57)
We want to have:
Doppler resolution = 1 Hz → TDWELL = 1 s (C.58)
f2 À f1 (C.59)
This implies that
1 1 2R
2 2 c
R ¿ 750 km (C.61)
Additional calculations to verify assumptions (target at the range of 10 km and at the speed
of 5 m
s):
2ν
fc = 30 Hz, Bfr t0 = 6000 Hz (C.62)
c
If we put radar range 150 km we will have L > 2000 (eg. 2048), and N=100.
D
APPENDIX
List of symbols and

abbreviations.
Abbreviations have following meaning (unless otherwise stated):

AB - Adaptive Beamforming
A/D - Analog-Digital converter
AIS - Automatic Identification System
AMTI - purely temporal Adaptive MTI
c - Speed of light
CDF - Cumulative Distribution Function
CFAR - Constant False Alarm Ratio
CPDF - Characteristic PDF
CW - Continuous Wave
DFT - Discrete Fourier Transform
EEZ - Exclusive Economic Zone
fD - Doppler frequency
FA - False Alarm
FFT - Fast Fourier Transform
FMCW - Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave
GLRT - Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test
H - Conjugate transpose
HF - High Frequency
IMO - International Maritime Organization
L - Number of range cells
LMSE - Least Mean Square Error
LO - Locally Optimum (detector)
LPF - Low Pass Filter
LRT - Likelihood Ratio Test
M - Number of antennas
ML - Maximum Likelihood
MMSI - Maritime Mobile Service Identity
APPENDIX D. LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS. 126
MTI - Moving Target Indication

MV - Minimum Variance
N - Number of pulses/chirps
OTH - Over The Horizon
PD - Probability of Detection
PDF - Probability Distribution Function
PPI - Plan position indicator
PRF - Pulse Repetition Frequency
PRI - Pulse Repetition Interval
R - Distance
RCS - Radar Cross Section
ROC - Receiver Operating Curve
SIRP - Spherically Invariant Random Process
SIRV - Spherically Invariant Random Vector
SM - Sample covariance Matrix
SNR - Signal to Noise Ratio
STAP - Space Time Adaptive Processing
T - Time
t - Time
TDD - Two Dirac Deltas
UTC - Universal time
Vr - Radial velocity relative to the radar
VAR - Variance
λ - Wavelength
⊗ - Hadamard product
Bibliography
[1] H. R. A. Dzvonkovskaya and K.-W. Gurgel, First results of ship detection and
tracking using WERA HF radar system, in Proc. IRS 2007 , 2007.
[2] A. Abdi, H. Barger and M. Kaveh, Signal modelling in wireless fading channels
using spherically invariant processes, in Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International
Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, vol. 5, (pp. 2997–3000), June
2000.
[3] Y. Abramovich, A. Gorokhov and N. Spencer, Convergence analysis of

stochastically-constrained spatial andspatio-temporal adaptive processing for hot-clutter
mitigation, in Proceedings of the Information, Decision and Control IDC 99 , (pp. 61–64),
1999.
[4] D. Barrick, FM/CW radar signals and digital processing, noaa technical report erl
283-wpl 26 , Technical report, 1973.
[5] D. Barrick, Extraction of wave parameters from measured HF radar sea-echo doppler
spectra, Radio Science, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 414–424, 1977.
[6] L. E. Brennan, J. Mallet and I. S. Reed, Adaptive arrays in airborne MTI radar ,
IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 607–615, September
1976.
[7] L. E. Brennan and I. S. Reed, Theory of adaptive radar , IEEE Transactions on

Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 237–252, March 1973.
[8] H. Chan, Maritime surveillance radar. part 1: Radar scattering from the ocean surface,
Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 137, no. 2, pp. 51–62, April 1990.
[9] H. Chan, Radar sea-clutter at low grazing angles, Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 137,
no. 2, pp. 102–112, April 1990.
[10] E. Conte and A. D. Maio, Mitigation techniques for non-gaussian sea clutter, IEEE
Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 284–302, April 2004.
[11] D. Crombie, Doppler spectrum of sea echo at 13.56 Mc./s., Nature, vol. 175, no. 4459,
pp. 681–682, 1955.
[12] R. L. Dykstra, Establishing the positive definitness of the sample covariance matrix ,
The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2153–2154, December 1970.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 128
[13] A. Dzvonkovskaya and H. Rohling, HF radar ship detection and tracking using
WERA system, in in Proc. IET RADAR 2007 , 2007.
[14] G. Fabrizio and A. Farina, Robust adaptive detection scheme for HF radar doppler
processing, in in Proc. IET RADAR 2007 , 2007.
[15] G. Fabrizio, G. Frazer and M. Turley, STAP for clutter and interference cancel-
lation in HF radar systems, in in Proc. ICASSP ’06 , (pp. 1033–1036), 2006.
[16] G. Fabrizio, D. Holdsworth and A. Farina, Experimental HF radar trial of real-

time STAP, in in Proc. Waveform Diversity and Design Conference, (pp. 316–320),
2007.
[17] G. Fabrizio, A. D. Maio, A. Farina and F. Gini, A generalized adaptive doppler

processing scheme for multi-channel radar systems, in in Proc. IRS 2007 , 2007.
[18] G. Fabrizio and M. Turley, An advanced STAP implementation for surveillance radar
systems, in in Proc. 11th IEEE Signal Processing Workshop, (pp. 134–137), 2001.
[19] A. Farina, G. Fabrizio and L. T. W.L. Melvin, Multichannel array processing in

radar: State of the art, hot topics and way ahead, in Sensor Array and Multichannel
Signal Processing Workshop Proceedings, (pp. 11–19), 2004.
[20] W. Feller, An introduction to probability theory and its applications, vol. II, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., second edition, 1971.
[21] T. Górski, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki, J.-M. Le Caillec and L. Lecornu,

Application of STAP technique to FMCW systems, in Proceedings of the European Radar
Conference EURAD 2007 in Munich, October 2007.
[22] T. Górski, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki, J.-M. Le Caillec and L. Lecornu,

Two dirac-deltas detector analysis for target detection in non-gaussian sea clutter, in
Proceedings of the 2007 Signal Processing Symposium in Jachranka, May 2007.
[23] T. Górski, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki, J.-M. Le Caillec and L. Lecornu, Two

dirac-deltas detector as an improved space-time adaptive processing in the presence of
non-gaussian sea clutter , in Proceedings of the International Radar Symposium IRS 2007
in Cologne, September 2007.
[24] T. Górski, J.-M. Le Caillec, A. Kawalec and W. Czarnecki, Space-time adaptive

processing in the presence of non-gaussian sea clutter, in Proceedings of the IET RADAR
2007 - The Institution of Engineering and Technology International Conference on Radar
Systems, Edinburgh, October 2007.
[25] T. Górski, J.-M. Le Caillec, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki, M. Lennon and

N. Thomas, Target detection using HF radar data, in Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE
Oceans in Aberdeen, June 2007.
[26] T. Górski, J.-M. Le Caillec, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki and N. T. M. Lennon,

Target detection using HF radar data, in in Proc. OCEANS ’07 , June 2007.
[27] T. Górski, J.-M. Le Caillec, L. Lecornu, A. Kawalec, W. Czarnecki,

J. Pietrasinski and B. Solaiman, Space-time adaptive processing analysis for the
BIBLIOGRAPHY 129
moving target on the sea surface indication purpose, in Proceedings of the 16-th Interna-
tional Conference on Microwaves, Radar and Wireless Communications - MIKON 2006,
Cracov , (pp. 199–202), May 2006.
[28] M. Greco, F. Bordoni and F. Gini, X-band sea-clutter nonstationarity: Influence of

long waves, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 269–283, April
2004.
[29] K.-W. Gurgel, G. Antonischki, H.-H. Essen and T. Schlick, Wellen radar
(WERA): a new ground-wave HF radar for ocean remote sensing, Coastal Engineer-
ing, vol. 37, no. 3–4, pp. 219–234, 1999.
[30] K.-W. Gurgel, H.-H. Essen and S. Kingsley, High-frequency radars: physical lil-
itations and recent developments, Coastal Engineering, vol. 37, no. 3–4, pp. 201–218,
1999.
[31] S. Haykin, R. Bakker and B. Currie, Uncovering nonlinear dynamics-the case study
of sea clutter , Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 90, no. 5, pp. 860–881, May 2002.
[32] S. Hovanessian, Introduction to Sensor Systems, Artech House, 1988.
[33] J. Hudson, Adaptive Arrays Principles, IEE, 1981.
[34] A. Hyvarinen, Survey on independent component analysis, Neural Computing Surveys,

vol. 2, pp. 94–128, 1999.
[35] S. Kassam, Signal Detection in Non-Gaussian Noise, Dowden & Culver, Inc., 1988.
[36] E. J. Kelly, An adaptive detection algorithm, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and

Electronic Systems, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 115–127, March 1986.
[37] R. Klemm, Principles of space-time adaptive processing, IEE, London, 2002.
[38] R. Klemm, Applications of space-time adaptive processing, IEE, London, 2004.
[39] N. Levanon, Radar principles, Wiley-Interscience, 1998.
[40] B. Lipa and D. Barrick, Extraction of sea state from HF radar sea echo: Mathematical
theory and modeling, Radio Science, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 81–100, 1986.
[41] R. Lyons, Understanding Digital Signal Processing, Addison-Wesley, 1997.
[42] H. W. Melief, H. Greidanus, P. van Genderen and P. Hoogeboom, Analysis

of sea spikes in radar sea clutter data, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote
Sensing, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 985–993, April 2006.
[43] W. L. Melvin, A STAP overview , IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronics

Systems Magazine, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 19–53, January 2004. Part 2 - Tutorials.
[44] R. A. Monzigo and T. W. Miller, Introduction to Adaptive Arrays, John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 1980.
[45] J. M. Nasr and D. Vidal-Madjar, Image simulation of geometric targets for space-
borne synthetic aperture radar , IEEE Transactions on geoscience and remote sensing,
vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 986–996, November 1991.
[46] F. Neeser and J. Massey, Proper complex random processes with applications to infor-
mation theory, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 1293–1302,
July 1993.
[47] F. Pascal, Détection et estimation en environnement non gaussien (in french), 2006.
PhD Thesis.
[48] J. Proakis, Digital Communications, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1989.
[49] M. Rangaswamy, D. Weiner and A. Ozturk, Computer generation of correlated

non-gaussian radar clutter , IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems,
vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 106–116, January 1995.
[50] I. S. Reed, L. E. Brennan and J. Mallet, Rapid convergence rate in adaptive arrays,
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 853–863,
November 1974.
[51] F. Robey, A CFAR adaptive matched filter detector , IEEE Transactions on Aerospace
and Electronic Systems, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 208–216, January 1992.
[52] K. J. Sangston and K. R. Gerlach, Coherent detection of radar targets in a non-

gaussian background, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronics Systems, vol. 30,
no. 2, pp. 330–340, April 1994.
[53] D. C. Schleher, MTI and Pulsed Doppler Radar , Artech House, 1991.
[54] W. Stehwien, Statistics and correlation properties of high resolution X-band sea clutter,
in Record of the 1994 IEEE National Radar Conference, (pp. 46–51), March 1994.
[55] N. Thomas, V. Mariette, M. Lennon, J. Le Caillec and T. Górski, Real time

mapping of clutter and environmental parameters with HF coastal radar for estimation
and possible improvement of further target detection performances, in Proceedings of
the EPNAV 2006 - up to date Environment Picture for prediction of naval systems
performances, Bruxelles, December 2006.
[56] H. V. Trees, Detection, Estimation and Modulation Theory, Part III , John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., 1971.
[57] D. Trizna, A model for Doppler peak spectral shift for low grazing angle sea scatter,
IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 368–375, October 1985.
[58] J. Ward and S. M. Kogon, Space-time adaptive processing (STAP) for AMTI and
GMTI radar , April 2004. Presentation for 2004 IEEE Radar Conference, April 26-29,
2004.
[59] K. Yao, A representation theorem and its applications to spherically-invariant random

processes, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 600–608, Septem-
ber 1973.
TELECOM BRETAGNE
MILITARY UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
MÉMOIRE DE THÈSE - SYNTHÈSE
Traitement Adaptatif Temps-Fréquence Pour les Radars de

Surveillance Maritime
Tomasz Górski
30.06.2008
Directeurs :
dr hab. inż Adam Kawalec, prof. WAT
dr hab. inż Jean-Marc Le Caillec, prof. Telecom Bretagne
L’objet de ce travail est l’étude de l’application de la technique du traitement spatio-
temporelle adaptative (en anglais STAP, Space-Time Adaptative Processing) pour la sur-
veillance de la surface de la mer. Ces techniques du STAP sont été développées afin d’utiliser
conjointement toute l’information disponible (énergie/Doppler) pour la détection de cibles,
et dans notre cas de cibles marines. En particulier, ce travail analyse les limitations dues au
fouillis de mer. En effet, le fouillis de mer présentent des caractéristiques qui ne sont pas
compatibles avec les hypothèses théoriques d’utilisation des STAP. Le fouillis présentent de
fortes non stationnarités aussi bien temporelles que spatiales. Il présente des statistiques non
gaussiennes, ce qui influe sur la forme du détecteur optimal. De plus, il présente un spectre
Doppler très étendu englobant l’écho Doppler de la cible. Par conséquent une redéfinition des
algorithmes de détection est un problème primordial pour une application en milieu marin.
Afin de tenir compte de la non gaussianité des signaux rétrodiffusés par la surface de la mer,
nous avons modélisé le fouillis de mer par un processus aléatoire sphériquement invariant
(SIRP) dont l’un des cas particuliers est le processus gaussien. En effet, les différentes sous-
classes des signaux SIRP se distinguent par une fonction auxiliaire d’une variable aléatoire
τ (lorsque cette variable aléatoire devient constante, nous retrouvons le cas gaussien usuel).
Afin de généraliser les détecteur à des cas non gaussien, une approximation de la densité de
probabilité de cette variable aléatoire par deux Dirac a été proposée. Une optimisation concer-
nant la distance entre les deux Diracs ainsi que des coefficients de pondération de ces Diracs a
été effectuée. Cette approximation sert à simplifier les calculs nécessaires pour la procédures
de détection et plus particulièrement pour l’estimation de la matrice de covariance. Cette
matrice est indispensable pour l’estimation du rapport de vraisemblance sur lequel se base
les procédures de détection. Plusieurs expériences d’application sur des données simulées du
traitement spatio-temporelle ont été faites. Des expériences similaires ont été effectués avec
des données réelles (obtenues à partir du radar HF WERA.), avec un état de mer connu ainsi
que deux navires dont les positions ont été fournies par un AIS (Automatic Identification
System). Les résultats (de simulation et expérimentaux) obtenus confirment la possibilité de
traitement STAP efficace pour la surveillance maritime. Des algorithmes plus classiques, tel
” l’Adaptative Multiple Target Indicators ” AMTI, ont aussi été développés à des fins de
comparaisons. Malgré le bruit, les interférences ou simplement le fouillis de mer en HF, les
résultats de détection des objets flottants par la technique STAP sont très prometteurs. Une
poursuite des recherches semble cependant nécessaire pour une application temps réel.
Space-Time Adaptive Signal Processing for Sea Surveillance Radars
There are several limitations of radar systems for sea surveillance. One group of limitations
is related to strong clutter from sea waves (especially during heavy seas periods). Therefore
a big challenge is to find new processing techniques for this application. In this work it is
proposed to apply Space-Time Adaptive Technique for target detection on the sea surface.
Problems addressed in this work cover : clutter non-stationarity in space and time, clutter
non-Gaussianity, clutter with spread Doppler spectrum. The purpose of this work is to resolve
these problems. As a result this work serves as a complete guide how to deal with sea clutter
by modifing STAP technique. In experiments author used a simulated data as well as data
from th real Surface Wave system WERA.
This PhD thesis is a result of cooperation between Military University of Technology in
Warsaw (Poland) and Telecom-Bretagne in Brest (France).
Traitement adaptatif temps-fréquence pour les radars de surveillance mari-

time
Il existe plusieurs limitations dans les systèmes radar de surveillance maritime. En par-
ticulier, un problème important est le fort retour électromagnétique de la surface de mer
(notamment pour les mers formées). La dééfinition de nouvelles techniques de traitement de
ces données radar est un domaine en pleine expansion. Dans cette thèse, nous proposons l’uti-
lisation de traitement adapatif dans les domaines temps-fréquence (STAP en englais) pour
la détection d’objets sur la surface de mer. Cependant, cette méthodologie est confrontée à
plusieurs difficultés : Non stationnarité (dans le temps et l’espace) du fouillis de mer, Non
gaussianité de ce fouillis, fouillis avec un spectre Doppler étendu. Le propos de ce travail a été
d’étudier des solutions à ces divers problèmes. En particulier, une modification des techniques
de STAP (traitement et décision) pour la prise en compte des problèmes mentionnés ci-dessus
est détaillée dans cette thèse. Ces modifications ont été testées sur des données simulées, mais
aussi sur des données réelles obtenues grâce au radar à onde de surface WERA.
Cette thèse s’inscrit dans le cadre de la coopération entre l’Université Militaire de Varsovie
et Télécom bretagne (Brest).

Signal Processing Radar

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Signal Processing Radar

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

reg.

Military University of Technology in Warsaw

with the authorisation of the University of Rennes 1

to obtain the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in association with Telecom

Domain : Signal Processing and Telecommunications

Universities : Telecom Bretagne and the Military University of Technology in Warsaw

Space-Time Adaptive Signal Processing for Sea

Defence December 9, 2008 before the examination board :

Reporters : Marc Acheroy, Professor at Royal Military Academy in Brussels

Examiners : Jean Marc Le-Caillec, Professor at Telecom Bretagne

2 Radar Basics, Space-Time Adaptive Processing and Target Detection. 3

3.1 Sea clutter characterization in X band. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

4 Two Dirac delta detector. 50

5 HF radar signals experiments and STAP technique modifications. 76

6 Conclusions and perspectives 104

A Gaussian complex process. 106

B Data generation. 108

C Space Time Adaptive Processing based on Frequency Modulated Contin-

D List of symbols and abbreviations. 125

1. Clutter non-stationarity in space and time.

3. Clutter with spread Doppler spectrum.

Figure 2.1 — Radar principle - electromagnetic wave reflection from a target.

more general form.

2.1 Radar principles.

Figure 2.2 — Basic time relations.

Figure 2.3 — Range gates.

Figure 2.5 — Environmental diagram [53].

PRF > 2fD (2.5)

This condition is a radar equivalent of Nyquist-Shannon-Kotelnikov theorem. It means, that

Figure 2.6 — Principle of MTI technique [53].

Figure 2.7 — Concept of steering antenna null toward interference [33].

Figure 2.9 — Two element adaptive antenna [33].

Figure 2.10 — Four antennas array [33].

Figure 2.11 — Complete adaptive array system [44].

Figure 2.12 — Airborne clutter [53].

2.2 Overview of STAP.

2.2.1 Problem Statement.

2.2.2 Radar System.

Figure 2.13 — Geometry of airborne antenna arrays [37].

Figure 2.14 — Moving radar system [58].

2.2.3 Airborne Clutter.

Figure 2.15 — Isodops [37].

Figure 2.16 — Range sphere [58].

Figure 2.17 — Isorange circles and isodops [53].

Figure 2.18 — Space-time structure of clutter [37].

Figure 2.19 — Data cube [43].

2.2.4 Adaptive MTI.

Figure 2.20 — Beamforming.

Figure 2.21 — Data snapshot.

2.2.5 STAP Processing.

xk = a · ss−t (fsp , fd ) (2.9)

Registered space-time snapshot is a result of coherent summation of waves from many

where yk is a resulting scalar, wk - weight vector, and superscript H denotes conjugate

β denotes scalar, R−1 H

gives test statistics [43]:

2.2.6 Assumptions and Limitations.

ct = xt cos(ωc t) − yt sin(ωc t) (2.15)

and yt is an Quadrature vector:

Similarly to one-dimensional case, we assume that:

Therefore it is possible to represent this process in complex notation. If we assume complex

then the covariance matrix is:

Using this notation, we describe multidimensional narrowband Gaussian process using M N x