Measurement and modelling of the dynamic radar cross-section of an unmanned aerial vehicle

The optimal radar detection of miniature unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) requires that the radar cross-section (RCS) of the UAVs be known. Although RCS estimates may be obtained from computer simulation and conventional static RCS measurements, the results may not be accurate given that the dynamic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:IET radar, sonar & navigation sonar & navigation, 2017-07, Vol.11 (7), p.1155-1160
Main Authors: Guay, Rudy, Drolet, Germain, Bray, Joey R
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
autonomous aerial vehicles
computer simulation
detection range probability
dynamic radar cross‐section measurement
flight quadcopter
miniature unmanned aerial vehicle dynamic effects
object detection
object tracking
optimal UAV radar detection
radar cross‐sections
radar detection
radar tracking
RCS estimation
Research Article
static RCS measurement
statistical analysis
statistical method
X‐band tracking radar
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The optimal radar detection of miniature unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) requires that the radar cross-section (RCS) of the UAVs be known. Although RCS estimates may be obtained from computer simulation and conventional static RCS measurements, the results may not be accurate given that the dynamic effects of the UAV, such as propeller motion, are absent. In this study, an X-band tracking radar is developed and used to measure the RCS of a mini-UAV while the UAV is in flight. Statistical methods are then applied to obtain models of the dynamic RCS for each aspect bin and for the UAV as a whole. For the particular quadcopter considered herein, the results indicate that the dynamic RCS is significantly higher than its static RCS. As a result, a target model developed from the dynamic RCS leads to a 15% increase of the 50% probability of detection range compared with a model based on static RCS measurements.
ISSN:1751-8784
1751-8792
1751-8792
DOI:10.1049/iet-rsn.2016.0520