r

MTI AND PULSE DOPPLER RADAR LH

The transversal filter with alternating binomial weights is closely related to the filter
which maximizes the average ofthe ratio lr = (S/C)ou,/(S/C)|n, where (S/C)O11, is the signal-to-
< clutter ratio at the output ofthe filter, and (S/C)in is the signal-to-clutter ratio at the input.34
The average is taken over the range of doppler frequencies. This criterion was first formulated
in a limited-distribution report by Emerson.5 The ratio lc was called in the early literature the
%
reference qoin, but it is now called the improvement factor for clutter. It is independent ofthe
target velocity and depends only on the weights wit the autocorrelation function (or power
^ spectrum) describing the clutter, and the number of pulses. For the two-pulse canceler (a single
"■' delay line), the optimum weights based on the above criterion are the same as the binomial
weights, when the clutter spectrum is represented by a gaussian function. 6 The difference
■^ between a transversal filter with optimal weights and one with binomial weights for a three-
pulse canceler (two delay lines) is less than 2 dB. 4i The difference is also small for higher-
order cancelers. Thus the improvement obtained with optimal weights as compared with
binomial weights is relatively small. This applies over a wide range of clutter spectral widths.
Similarly, it is found that the use of a criterion which maximizes the clutter attenuation (ratio
. of input cinder power to the output clutter power) is also well approximated by a transversal
~ filter with binomial weights of alternating sign when the clutter spectrum can be represented
by a gaussian function whose spectral width is small compared to the pulse repetition
J frequency.1 Thus the delay line cancellers with response sin" n/j Tare "optimum" in the sense
that they approximate the filters which maximize the average signal -to-clutter ratio or
the average clutter attentuation. It also approximates the filter which maximizes the probability
of detection for a target at the midband doppler frequency or its harmonics. 6
In spite ofthe fact that such filters are "optimum" in several senses as mentioned above,
-A they do not necessarily have characteristics that are always desirable for an MTI filter. The
notches at dc, at the prf, and the harmonics of the prf are increasingly broad with increasing
number of delay lines. Although added delay lines reduce the clutter, they also reduce the
^ number of moving targets detected because ofthe narrowing ofthe passband. For example, if
the — 10 dB response of the filter characteristic is taken as the threshold for detection and if
the targets are distributed uniformly across the doppler frequency band, 20 percent of all
targets will be rejected by a two-pulse canceler (single delay-line canceler), 38 percent will be
rejected by a three-pulse canceler (double canceler), and 48 percent by a four-pulse canceler
< (triple canceler) These filters might be "optimum" in that they satisfy the specified criterion,
but the criterion might not be the best for satisfying MTI requirements. (Optimum is not a
synonym for best; it means the best under the given set of assumptions.) Maximizing the
signal-lo-cluttcr ratio over all doppler frequencies, which leads to the binomial weights and
sin" nft T filters, is not necessarily a pertinent criterion for design of an MTI filter since this
^ criterion is independent of the target signal characteristics.'" 5 It would seem that the MTI
filter should be shaped (0 irjixl the clutter al d-c and around the prf and its harmonics, but
have a flat response ovci the legion where no clutter is expected. That is, it would be desirable
* to have the freedom to shape the filter response, just as with any conventional filter.
The trnnsvrisiil, 01 nmiin-iiisivr, filter of Fig. 4.11 can be designed to achieve filter
responses suitable (in M i l 1 '" but n relatively large number of delay lines are needed for
filters with driiiIIblr i Imim lnisli<s. An N — I delay-line canceler requires N pulses, which sets ;i
rMtriclloil <>" llM MII I II I X I'NIM- irpetition frequency, beamwidth, and antenna rotation rate,
« 01 dwell time
I iio'ir -1 12" ikOWl tin- uiii|iliimlr response for (1) a classical three-pulse canceler with
sin1 nlj I mponHi (.') II l lv r piiUr "optimum" canceler designed to maximize the improvement
IIK I in ' mill (I) » |J pulir rniirrlri with a Chebyshev filter characteristic. (The amplitude
N
i\ IICIMH.II I/ HI In <11v
 INTRODUCTION TO RADAR SYSTEMS
i-Vr
s Single
Frequency

Figure
4.10
Relative
frequency
response
of the

single-delay-line canceler (solid curve) and the double-delay-line canceler (dashed curve). Shaded area
represents clutter speclrum.

which is the same as the output from the double-delay-line canceler.

f(t)-f(t+T)-f(t + T)+f(t + 2T)
This configuration is commonly called the three-pulse canceler.

Transversal filters. The three-pulse canceler shown in Fig. 4.9b is an example of a transversal
filter. Its general form with N pulses and N - 1 delay lines is shown in Fig. 4.11. It is also
sometimes known as a feedforward filter, a nonrecursive filter, a finite memory filter or a tapped
delay-line filter. The weights w( for a three-pulse canceler utilizing two delay lines arranged as a
transversal filter are 1, -2, 1. The^requency response function is proportional to sin 2 nf4T. A
transversal filter with three delay lines whose weights are 1, -3, 3, -1 gives a sin1 n/4T response.
This is a four-pulse canceler. Its response is equivalent to a triple canceler consisting of a cascade
of three single-delay-line cancelers. (Note the potentially confusing nomenclature. A cascade
configuration of three delay lines, each connected as a single canceler, is called a triple
canceler, but when connected as a transversal filter it is called a four-pulse canceler.) The ■ . . , . /

weights for a transversal filter with n delay lines that gives a response sin" nft T are the
coefficients of the expansion of (1 - x)", which are the binomial coefficients with alternating
signs:
n!
w. -(-IV (i-1)1'
i = 1 , 2 ....... n + 1 (4.10)

Input

Summer

Figure 4.11 General form of a trans-

versal (or nonrecursive) filter for MTI
Output signal processing.