By Topic

A new projection based algorithm for low sidelobe pattern synthesis in adaptive arrays

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $33
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

1 Author(s)
G. M. Herbert ; DERA, Malvern, UK

The primary objective of adaptive beamforming is to suppress jamming signals while maintaining the response of the array in the desired signal direction. It is also desirable to obtain low sidelobes in the adaptive beam pattern and to minimise sidelobe jitter in order to aid the performance against clutter and pulsed deception jammers. Sample matrix inversion (SMI) is one of the simplest adaptive beamforming algorithms, involving minimisation of the average output power for a set of input data vectors (snapshots), subject to constraints on the beam pattern. However, the basic SMI algorithm tends to produce beam patterns with high sidelobes away from the jammer directions and considerable weight and sidelobe jitter. Penalty function methods as given in Hughes and McWhirter (see SPIE Proc.2563, p.170-81) and methods based on subspace projection e.g. Richardson (see Proc. of EUSIPCO-94, vol.3, p.1301-4, 1994), are two types of method which can be used to overcome the problem of high sidelobes and weight jitter while maintaining an acceptable signal to noise plus interference ratio (SNIR). This paper presents a new algorithm, which has been termed `constrained adaptive beam pattern synthesis' (CAPS). It is a projection based algorithm which incorporates the pattern fitting element of penalty function methods in order to obtain the best possible sidelobe levels. It therefore combines the benefits of subspace and penalty function approaches. Following an explanation of the algorithm, an investigation of its performance in the presence of mainlobe and sidelobe jamming is presented

Published in:

Radar 97 (Conf. Publ. No. 449)

Date of Conference:

14-16 Oct 1997