See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/252019876

Orthogonal waveforms for FMCW MIMO radar

Article  in  IEEE National Radar Conference - Proceedings · May 2011

DOI: 10.1109/RADAR.2011.5960625

CITATIONS READS
37 2,410

3 authors, including:

Ard-Jan de Jong

21 PUBLICATIONS   158 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

MERITS View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ard-Jan de Jong on 09 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Orthogonal Waveforms for FMCW MIMO Radar
J. J. M. de Wit, W. L. van Rossum, A. J. de Jong
TNO
The Hague, The Netherlands
wim.vanrossum@tno.nl
Abstract—Multiple input/multiple output (MIMO) radar system
performance benefits from the capability to simultaneously
transmit and receive multiple orthogonal waveforms. For pulse
radars fitting orthogonal waveforms have been developed. These
waveforms are however not necessarily suitable for frequency-
modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar.
The major benefit of the FMCW radar principle is that the
bandwidth of the beat signal is generally much smaller than the
signal bandwidth, relaxing sampling requirements. Preferably,
this benefit should be preserved when applying orthogonal
waveforms in an FMCW MIMO radar configuration. In this
paper, orthogonal waveforms compatible with the FMCW radar
principle will be discussed and tested by experiment or
simulation.
I. INTRODUCTION
The operations of the army have shifted in recent years
from an open environment with regular forces to an urban
environment with irregular opponents. The challenges in an
urban environment are maintaining situation awareness,
detection of small targets such as improvised explosive
devices, and identification of friendly forces, insurgents, and
neutral civilians. For the navy the operational environment
becomes more complex also, since operations shift to littoral
areas and harbors.
Multiple input/multiple output (MIMO) operation
improves radar performance in challenging environments.
MIMO radar combines the benefits of the floodlight concept,
longer integration times, and frequency and spatial diversity of
multiple transmit and receive antennas to improve detection,
tracking, and recognition of extended objects [1].
The key ingredient of MIMO radar operation is that
multiple orthogonal waveforms can be used simultaneously,
where each waveform is associated with a single transmitter.
Orthogonal waveforms are defined as waveforms with very
low cross correlation. Ideally, the cross correlation should be
zero for all time delays and Doppler shifts. Although some
codes exist with very low autocorrelation in time, such as
Barker-codes, and codes exist with very low cross correlation
when time synchronized, such as Walsh-Hadamard and Gold
sequences, codes which are orthogonal in time and Doppler
are rare.
978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
The easiest way to obtain orthogonal waveforms is time
division. At each time only a single transmitter transmits. The
receivers receive the signals which correspond to a single
transmitter. The path from the transmitter to target to receiver
is associated with the received signal. In time division, the
signal corresponding to a whole array (with many
transmitters) requires multiple pulses, thus reducing the
effective pulse repetition frequency (PRF). Therefore, time-
division multiplexing might not be adequate for operations
requiring high PRF.
For frequency division there is no overlap in frequencies
transmitted; each transmitter occupies at least a bandwidth in
the spectral domain. Simultaneous reception of the different
waveforms requires an extended bandwidth to be sampled.
This may lead to a combined bandwidth of all transmitters
wider than can be sampled by present-day analog-to-digital
convertors.
Code division requires no increase in sampling rate. All
transmitters transmit at the same center frequency with similar
bandwidths. For pulsed radar systems the matched filter is
used for filtering the different waveforms. For frequency-
modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar this approach is
not possible.
In the following section, orthogonal waveforms that are
compatible with FMCW radar principle will be discussed. In
Section III, the performance of the proposed waveforms will
be assessed with the aid of measured data and simulations.
The paper is completed with the conclusion in Section IV.
II. ORTHOGONAL WAVEFORMS FOR FMCW RADAR
As opposed to pulse radar systems, FMCW radar systems
transmit a continuous wave. The frequency of the transmitted
waveform is linearly modulated. Targets present in the
antenna beam scatter a fraction of the transmitted signal back
in the direction of the radar. After a certain time delay this
backscattered signal is captured by the radar receiver.
In the receiver, the backscattered signal is demodulated
with a nondelayed replica of the transmitted signal (i.e. the
reference signal) and subsequently low-pass filtered. The
resulting signal is called the beat signal. The frequency of the
beat signal is a measure for the range to the target. One major
686
benefit of the FMCW radar principle is that the bandwidth of
the beat signal is normally much narrower than the bandwidth
of the transmitted waveform relaxing sampling requirements.
When applying orthogonal waveforms in an FMCW
MIMO radar configuration, e.g. [2], it is important that the
benefit of narrow-band sampling is maintained. Furthermore,
coherency between the signals received from different
transmitters must be ensured. Coherency is mandatory if
further coherent processing, such as digital beam forming, is
to be applied.
A. Division by Beat-Frequency Offset
In case of beat-frequency division, the reference signal of
the receiver sR as function of time t is given as
{ (
s R (t ) = exp i ⋅ 2πf c t + πγ t 2 . )}
Here, fc is the RF carrier frequency and γ the chirp rate. The
transmitted signal, sT is the receiver signal shifted in frequency
∆fb, see Figure 1, plus a phase term
  ∆f 2  
s T (t ) = exp i ⋅  2π { f c − ∆ f b }t + πγ t 2 + π b  . (2)
  γ 
Note that time t is defined on the interval -τT/2 to +τT/2. The
frequency shift ∆fb is introduced to ensure that the responses
associated with different transmitters are orthogonal in the
beat frequency domain. The third phase term is included to
facilitate the compensation of the residual video phase (RVP)
term, as will be explained below.
∆tb
∆fb
τT
Figure 1. Frequency modulation of one transmitter (orange) and frequency
modulation of the following transmitter (blue).
The received signal from a target is a time-delayed version
of the transmitted waveform mixed with the receive waveform
s(t ) = sR (t ) ⋅ sT* (t − ∆t )
  (
∆f + γ∆t
2
) 
= expi ⋅  2πfc∆t + 2π {∆fb + γ∆t}t − π b .

  γ (see Figure 2). During this idle time the transmitter is switched

Here, ∆t is the time delay associated with the target range. The
components of the phase term are: the desired phase
978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
corresponding to target range, the desired beat frequency, and
the RVP.
If coherent processing is applied afterwards, the RVP term
needs to be compensated. The RVP can be compensated with
the aid of the following observation
f b = ∆f b + γ ∆ t ,
(∆f b + γ ∆t )2 f b2 (4)
ϕ RVP = π =π .
γ γ
In the range domain, i.e. after applying a Fourier transform,
the RVP can be compensated by multiplication with the phase
term ϕRVP defined in (4). Subsequently, the data can be split
into the signals corresponding to the different transmitters (i.e.
(1) different values of ∆fb).
By applying beat-frequency division, the sample rate will
increase as compared to the single transmitter case. However,
the required increase in sample rate is small relative to the
signal bandwidth. This is due to the large overlap (in
frequency) between the transmitted signals. The required
increase in sample rate when e.g. frequency division multiple
access (FDMA) is applied is much larger. Consider the
measurement set-up discussed in Section III, i.e. three
transmitters with each 50 MHz signal bandwidth. When
FDMA is applied, this would require a receiver with 150 MHz
instantaneous bandwidth and corresponding sampling rate
(both for pulsed and FMCW radar systems). In case of beat-
frequency division, the required increase in sample rate is just
6 MHz (i.e. 3∆fb).
Beat-frequency division can also be obtained by applying a
small shift in time (see Figure 1). This shift in time, ∆tb yields
similar results as the frequency shift, ∆fb.
B. Division by Chirp-Rate Offset
In case of chirp-rate division, the reference signal is
{ ( )}
s R (t ) = exp i ⋅ 2π fc t + πγ t 2 . (5)
Compared to the reference signal, the chirp rate of the
transmitted waveform is modified with an offset ∆γT
{ (
sT (t ) = exp i ⋅ 2π fc t + π (γ + ∆γ T )t 2 . )} (6)
In order to maintain range resolution, the overall signal
bandwidth must be the same for all transmitters. As a
consequence, the chirp time must be different for each
(3) transmitter. Thus to ensure synchronization with the reference
signal, some idle time between transmitted chirps is required
off. Note that the chirp time of the transmitters must be less
than the chirp time of the reference signal.
687
After mixing in the receiver, the beat signal follows as when a moving target is present is schematically depicted in
Figure 2. The chirp rate of the received signal now follows as
s(t) = sR (t) ⋅ sT* (t − ∆t )
{(
= expi ⋅ 2π fc∆t − π∆γ Tt 2 + 2π (γ + ∆γ T )∆t ⋅ t − π (γ + ∆γT )∆t 2 .)} (B + f ) − f
d, 2 d ,1 ∆ fd
(7) γ '= = γT + , (12)
τT τT
The phase constituents are: the desired phase corresponding to
target range, a residual quadratic phase term due to the offset where fd is the Doppler frequency shift and ∆fd is the variation
in chirp rate, the desired beat frequency, and the RVP. of the Doppler frequency shift over the signal bandwidth.
When the beat signal (7) is range compressed, the target From (12) it can be concluded that, when ∆fd/τT approaches
response will be spread due to the residual quadratic phase ∆γT, orthogonality between the transmitted signals will
term. In order to obtain a focused, localized response, the diminish (depending on the actual measurement geometry).
quadratic phase term must be compensated before range
compression. This compensation provides separation between In order to ensure low cross correlation between the
transmitted signals, the following condition must be satisfied
the transmitters, because the chirp-rate offset is different for
each transmitter.
The desired separation can be expressed in terms of the ∆fd 2v r B
ratio between the peak level of a focused response and the = ⋅ << ∆γ T , (13)
τT c τT
peak level of a response that is spread. This ratio can be
approximated as
in which vr is the target radial velocity and c is the speed of
light. Given the waveform settings discussed in Section III.B,
τ −2 , (8) condition (13) leads to a maximum (radial) target velocity of
α= 16⋅106 ms-1! Thus in practice, condition (13) will normally be
τ − 2 + ∆B 2 1
∆B >>
τ
fulfilled.
in which τ is the chirp time and ∆B is the difference in fd,2
bandwidth between transmitter and reference signal as defined
in Figure 2. The best separation is obtained when the energy ∆B
of the unfocused response is spread over the complete
sampled beat spectrum width. This is achieved by setting ∆B B
to
fd,1
∆B = f s , (9)
τT idle time
where fs is the sample rate. If ∆B has been set, the chirp time transmitter
for transmitter n can be found as
Figure 2. Frequency modulation of the reference signal (blue), frequency
modulation of one transmitter (orange), and the frequency modulation of the
B − n ⋅ ∆B (10) received signal when a moving target is present (red-brown).
τ T, n =
γ
An important drawback of chirp-rate division is that the
in which B is the full signal bandwidth (see Figure 2). energy of unfocused responses is spread over the beat
Subsequently, the chirp-rate offset follows as spectrum. Thus effectively the noise floor will increase for
every transmitter that is added to the MIMO radar system.
B
∆γ T,n = −γ . (11) C. Code Division
τ T,n
In order to keep the benefit of the FMCW radar principle,
From (10) it is clear that for every transmitter that is added to codes need to be superimposed on the linear chirp while at the
the MIMO radar the chirp time becomes shorter and the chirp same time the corresponding (code) bandwidth should be
rate increases. This limits the number of transmitters that can small. The receiver needs to be able to separate the different
be applied within the MIMO radar. Effectively, for every signals from the different transmitters. Therefore it is chosen
added transmitter, duty cycle is reduced and the signal-to- that the receiver demodulates the signals with only the linear
noise ratio will decrease. Moreover, due to the higher chirp chirp, thus no coding is applied on the reference signal
rate, beat frequencies will increase and the unambiguous range
shortens for each transmitter that is added to the MIMO radar
(for a given sample rate). { (
s R (t ) = exp i ⋅ 2πf c t + πγ t 2 . )} (14)
When a moving target is present, the chirp rate of the received
signal is affected. In principle, this may affect the
orthogonality between the transmitted signals. The situation

978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE 688

The transmitted waveforms are coded with a binary phase
shift keying (BPSK) signal with a low update rate (i.e. small
bandwidth)
{ ( )}
sT (t ) = exp i ⋅ 2π f c t + πγ t 2 + β (t ) ⋅ 12 π , (15)
in which β is the BPSK code with low update rate and values
of +1 or -1. Mixing of the backscattered signal with the
reference signal yields
s (t ) = s R (t ) ⋅ s T* (t − ∆t )
(16)
{( )}
= exp i ⋅ 2πf c ∆t + 2πγ∆tt − πγ∆t 2 − 12 π ⋅ β (t − ∆t ) .
The phase constituents are: the desired phase corresponding to
target range, the desired beat frequency, the RVP, and the
time-shifted but known BPSK code. The BPSK code broadens
the response after range compression and needs to be
removed. This will at the same time suppress the responses
from other transmitters which have different BPSK codes.
Although the code is known, the linear phase differs for
different targets. A matched filter cannot be applied because
of this linear phase term.
However, when the signals are aligned in time, the BPSK
code will be identical for all target responses. From (16) the
time shift required is the same as the time shift applied by the
RVP compensation. The RVP compensation aligns the signals
in time including the BPSK code. The processing to obtain the
response corresponding to a single transmitter becomes
1. Fourier transform received data to beat frequency domain;
2. Multiply with RVP phase compensation;
3. Inverse Fourier transform back to time domain;
4. Multiply with BPSK code compensation from desired
transmitter;
5. Fourier transform back to beat frequency domain.
In order for the RVP compensation to align the data in
time correctly with the known BPSK code, the response of the
target should be sufficiently narrow after the first Fourier
transform. However, a narrow response in the frequency
domain yields a low suppression of the other semi-orthogonal
codes. If the target response becomes too wide, the
compensation of the BPSK code needs to take into account the
influence of the RVP compensation. The cross correlation
between received signals with different codes but the same
beat frequency originates from the original bandwidth of the
BPSK code.
III. RESULTS
The experiments to verify the feasibility of the proposed
orthogonal waveforms have been conducted with EMERALD
[3], [4]. EMERALD is an X-band FMCW radar equipped with
an active electronically scanned array. The signal bandwidth is
50 MHz (3 m range resolution).
In EMERALD, the FMCW waveforms are generated
digitally with the aid of a direct digital synthesizer (DDS).
978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
EMERALD comprises eight transceivers each equipped with a
dedicated DDS. This enables transmission of space-time
coded waveforms because each DDS can generate a different
waveform. The DDSs can be programmed through a serial
computer interface enabling control over several radar signal
parameters, such as the transmit frequency, sweep bandwidth,
sweep duration, phase, and amplitude. The flexibility of the
DDSs also allows for transmitters to be switched on or off
independently.
A. Measurements Beat-Frequency Division
The feasibility of beat-frequency division was tested by
switching-on three transmitters and applying an offset of ∆fb =
2 MHz between the transmitted waveforms. The result for a
single receiver is presented in Figure 3. The three large peaks
located at 2 MHz, 4 MHz and 6 MHz are the responses to the
three orthogonal transmissions. It is clear that the induced
beat-frequency offset is preserved and that the responses can
be separated in the beat frequency domain.
Division by frequency offset
140
Responses to different
130
transmitters
120
110
Power [.]
100
90
80
70
60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Beat frequency [MHz]
Figure 3. The beat spectrum of a single receiver when three transmitters are
switched-on with 2 MHz beat-frequency offset. The y-axis is in dB scale.
The tests were carried out in the anechoic room at TNO
with a corner reflector in front of the radar. Due to the limited
size of the anechoic room, the reflector could be placed at a
maximum range of 7 m from the radar. As a consequence, the
response to the reflector and the array crosstalk are in adjacent
range resolution cells (recall that the range resolution of
EMERALD is 3 m). The large peaks as seen in Figure 3 are
actually due to the array crosstalk. The actual responses to the
corner reflector are much smaller.
The response to the corner reflector is visible in Figure 4.
This figure shows a detailed look of the peak around 4 MHz.
As can be seen, the response to the reflector is indeed very
close to the array crosstalk. As a result, the response to the
reflector is corrupted by phase noise associated with the array
crosstalk. It was therefore not feasible to perform e.g. beam
forming to show experimentally that coherency between the
transmitters is preserved when applying beat-frequency
division. In simulations the coherence was present and beam
forming could be applied.
689
 Division by frequency offset Division by sweep-rate offset

130
120
Energy T2; ∆B = 4.8 MHz
120
115
Array Crosstalk
110 110

Power [.]
Response to Reflector
Power [.]

105
100

100
90
95

80
Energy T3; ∆B = 9.6 MHz
90

85 70
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Beat frequency [MHz]
3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4
Beat frequency [MHz] Division by sweep-rate offset

Figure 4. A detailed look at the peak around 4 MHz; the response to the 130

reflector is much smaller than the crosstalk. The y-axis is in dB scale. Focused Response
(close to zero-frequency)
120

B. Measurements Chirp-Rate Division

110
With the aid of EMERALD, also the feasibility of division
Power [.]
by chirp-rate offset was tested. Again three transmitters were 100
switched-on, in this case each with different chirp times. The
settings of the transmitters T1, T2, and T3 were as follows: 90

T1: τ1 = 100 µs, γ1 = 480 GHz/s and ∆γ1 = 0;

80
T2: τ2 = 90 µs, γ2 = 533 GHz/s and ∆γ2 = 53.3 GHz/s;
T3: τ3 = 80 µs, γ3 = 600 GHz/s and ∆γ3 = 120 GHz/s. 70
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The resultant difference in bandwidth ∆B is 4.8 MHz. Beat frequency [MHz]

Division by sweep-rate offset

The results of the measurements are shown in Figure 5.
Following the procedure described in Section II.B, the 130
orthogonal transmissions have been separated; the upper
figure shows the response to T1, the middle figure shows the 120
response to T2 and finally the lower figure shows the response
to T3. All focused responses are close to zero-frequency due 110
to the very short measurement range, as was discussed in the
Power [.]

previous subsection. 100

From the figures it is clear that the responses to the

90
transmissions are focused when applying the fitting phase
compensation (depending on the actual chirp-rate offset). It
80
can also be seen that the energy of orthogonal transmissions is
spread over a wide band, as is indicated in the upper figure:
70
over 4.8 MHz for T2 and over 9.6 MHz for T3. This illustrates 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Beat frequency [MHz]
the main disadvantage of chirp-rate division: effectively the
noise floor is increased with every orthogonal transmission Figure 5. The beat spectra when applying chirp-rate division. The upper
that is added to the MIMO radar. figure shows the response to T1, the middle figure shows the response to T2,
and the lower figure shows the response to T3. The y-axes are in dB scale.
C. Code Division
Since EMERALD does not allow coding of waveforms, The BPSK codes are generated by taking the sign of a
code division has been evaluated by simulation. This Gaussian distributed random number. Code division
simulation is based on two transmitters with a single receiver. multiplexing is assessed with a code that has equal number of
The modules work at X-band at 10 GHz. The transmitted samples per symbol and one that has a varied number of
bandwidth is 1 GHz which yields a range resolution of 15 cm. samples per symbol, see Figure 6. Due to the repetitiveness of
The chirp time is 1 ms. The sampling rate is 10 MHz (real the code with a fixed number of samples per symbol the
samples), such that the unambiguous range is 750 m. One spectrum shows peaks every 100 range cells (total number of
target is located at 90 m. range cells divided by number of symbols).

978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE 690


Figure 6. Phase code with fixed number of samples per symbol (red)
compared to a code with variable number of samples per symbol (blue).
D. Ambiguity Functions
The different orthogonal waveforms are also compared by
investigation of the ambiguity function. In Figure 7A the
autocorrelation is shown for a single sweep for a stationary
target at 75 m (sweep time of 1 ms and bandwidth of
150 MHz). As is expected for a FMCW signal the range and
radial velocity are ambiguous. In Figure 7B the correlation
with the response from a transmitter with a 2 MHz beat
frequency offset is shown. The signal is suppressed by 80 dB.
Figure 7C shows the correlation of the response with signal
which has a difference in sweep rate of 5.3 GHz/s. The signal
is suppressed by 40 dB, similar to the expected noise
reduction (fluctuations in the cross correlation are very small
compared to the color scale). Finally, Figure 7D shows the
cross correlation between the response with a different BPSK
code (100 bits with between 50 and 150 samples per bit). The
suppression is again noise-like, about 35 to 40 dB.
IV. CONCLUSION
Orthogonal waveforms compatible with the FMCW radar
principle have been proposed and their performance has been
evaluated using measured data and simulations. When
applying orthogonal waveforms in FMCW radar, it is
important that the main benefit of the FMCW radar principle,
i.e. the relative low sample rate, is preserved.
978-1-4244-8902-2/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
View publication stats
A B
C D
Figure 7. Ambiguity functions: A) autocorrelation, B) cross correlation
with frequency offset, C) cross correlation with chirp-rate offset, and D) with
different BPSK modulation.
The proposed waveforms that are orthogonal in the beat
frequency domain lead to increased sample rates, as compared
to the single transmitter case. However, compared to for
instance FDMA, the required increase in sample rate is
relatively small. Chirp-rate and code division do not
necessitate higher sample rates but they have the disadvantage
that the energy associated with orthogonal transmissions is
spread over a wide band, effectively increasing the noise floor.
REFERENCES
[1] B. J. Donnet and I. D. Longstaff, “MIMO Radar Techniques and
opportunities,” in Proc. EuRAD, Manchester, U.K., September 13 – 15,
2006, pp. 112 – 115.
[2] J. J. M. de Wit, W. L. van Rossum, and F. M. A. Smits, "Principal
scatterer detection in buildings with SAPPHIRE," in Proc. EUSAR,
Aachen, Germany, June 7 – 10, 2010.
[3] C. M. Lievers, W. L. van Rossum, A. P. M. Maas, and A. G. Huizing,
“Digital beam forming on transmit and receive with an AESA FMCW
radar,” in Proc. EuRAD, Munich, Germany, October 8 - 12, 2007,
pp. 47 – 50.
[4] W. L. van Rossum, C. M. Lievers, A. P. M. Maas, and A. G. Huizing,
“Suppression of sidelobe scatterers in an AESA FMCW radar,” in
Proc. IEEE Radar Conf., Rome, Italy, May 26 – 30, 2008, pp. 1167 –
1171.
691