Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T01:29:46.201Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Surface and subsurface radar equations for radar sounders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2020

Mark S. Haynes*
Affiliation:
Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, USA
*
Author for correspondence: Mark Haynes, E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This work is a collection of radar equations for low-frequency radar sounding and radar in general that emphasize the form of the radar equation for different target and source geometries. This is meant as a handbook for scientists and engineers that work with or analyze radar sounder systems and interpret radar sounding echoes. Lookup tables summarize the results and derivations are provided for each equation.

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is included and the original work is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020

1. Introduction

Low-frequency radar sounders (e.g, HF, VHF) have been used for decades to probe ice-sheets and subsurfaces for both terrestrial and planetary science investigations. They are nadir pointing radar systems that have wide along-track and cross-track beam patterns. Terrestrial airborne sounders include High-Capability Radar Sounder (HiCARS), Multichannel Coherent Radar Depth Sounder (MCoRDS), Polarimetric Airborne Survey Instrument (PASIN) and Polarimetric Airborne Radar Ice Sounder (POLARIS) (Peters and others, Reference Peters, Blankenship and Morse2005, Reference Peters2007; Hélière and other, Reference Hélière, Lin, Corr and Vaughan2007; Shi and others, Reference Shi2010; Karlsson and other, Reference Karlsson, Rippin, Vaughan and Corr2009; Dall and others, Reference Dall2010; Rodriguez-Morales and others, Reference Rodriguez-Morales2013). Planetary sounders include Mars Advanced Radar for Subsurface and Ionospheric Sounding (MARSIS), Shallow Radar (SHARAD) and Lunar Radar Sounder (LRS) (Picardi and others, Reference Picardi2004; Seu and others, Reference Seu2007; Ono and Oya, Reference Ono and Oya2000), as well as Radar for Europa Assessment and Sounding: Ocean to Near-surface (REASON) and Radar for Icy Moon Exploration (RIME), (Blankenship and other, Reference Blankenship, Young, Moore and Moore2009; Moussessian, Reference Moussessian2015; Bruzzone and others, Reference Bruzzone2013), which are currently being developed.

The choice of radar equation for radar sounding analysis, and radar in general, has important implications for system link budgets and scientific interpretation of radar echoes. While there is one fundamental radar equation, it will take different forms depending on the properties of the target and source geometry. These forms elucidate different aspects of the problem and highlight sensitivity to certain parameters, such as the exponent of the geometric power fall-off or the origin of certain multiplying constants. For example, there is a 10 dB swing between the radar equation derived for a flat surface Fresnel zone with plane wave incidence and the radar equation derived using the image method (Haynes and others, Reference Haynes, Chapin and Schroeder2018). Another example is geometric spreading losses that must be corrected when estimating absolute surface or basal reflectivity, and in the case of high-altitude planetary sounders, the use of flat or spherical surface assumptions can change this correction by several dB. It is up to the practitioner to choose the radar equation that is most appropriate for their problem. The wide variety of possible target and source geometries that need to be considered when doing system analysis or interpreting echoes is the central motivation for compiling the tables that follow.

This work is a collection of radar equations for the analysis of low-frequency radar sounding systems, and radar systems in general. The purpose is to serve as a handbook for scientists and engineers to quickly look up these equations, assumptions and derivations. Emphasis is placed on the form of the radar equation under different sensor and target geometries, rather than the details of radar system hardware, signal processing or scattering phenomenology. Many of these equations appear in textbooks and throughout the literature (Gudmandsen, Reference Gudmandsen and Wait1971; Ulaby and others, Reference Ulaby, Moore and Fung1982; Chyba and others, Reference Chyba, Ostro and Edwards1998; Biccari and other, Reference Biccari, Picardi, Seu and Melacci2001; Picardi and others, Reference Picardi2004; Peters and others, Reference Peters, Blankenship and Morse2005; Ulaby and others, Reference Ulaby2014; Haynes and others, Reference Haynes, Chapin and Schroeder2018), but a central collection does not exist and several new variants are included here. This is meant as a starting point for comparison, system analysis and scientific interpretation of radar echoes and builds on the results in Haynes and others (Reference Haynes, Chapin and Schroeder2018).

The geometries for which radar equations are derived and tabulated here are combinations of, but not limited to:

  1. 1. active/passive radar sounding

  2. 2. Fresnel-zone/pulse-limited target area

  3. 3. surface/subsurface interfaces

  4. 4. flat/spherical surfaces

  5. 5. spherical-wave/plane-wave incidence

  6. 6. monostatic/bistatic source and receiver configurations

Most geometries are for normal incidence over a homogeneous medium, with special attention to Fresnel-zone sized targets. Several off-nadir geometries are included, as well as a section on bistatic geometries and bistatic Fresnel zones, which is included for general reference and to show how the bistatic expressions reduce to the simpler cases in the right limits. Finally, geometries for passive radar sounding, which uses astronomical or natural radio sources in place of a transmitter (Cecconi and others, Reference Cecconi2012; Romero-Wolf and others, Reference Romero-Wolf2015; Schroeder and others, Reference Schroeder2016; Peters and others, Reference Peters, Schroeder, Castelletti, Haynes and Romero-Wolf2018), are included as well. In passive sounding, the incidence field is truly planar, which has interesting consequences for its radar equations.

Section 2 contains lookup tables that summarize the results. Each table row includes a short description of the geometry, a graphical representation of the geometry, the equation and citation, as well as the section and equation numbers in the Supplementary Material where derivations can be found. New variants, or those for which citations were not readily found, are noted with ***. Derivations rely largely on image methods, large-argument approximations, small-angle approximations and scalar surface phase integrals under the assumption of Kirchhoff scattering. Observations, recommendations and commentary are included throughout the derivations to help draw attention to notable connections between results.

While the primary application is low-frequency radar sounding, the equations are general enough that the user can augment these for their particular problem and radar system. The list is not exhaustive, and more advanced variants and combinations exist and can be derived, for instance expressions that contain integrals over angle-dependent antenna beam patterns or scattering functions.

The organization of the paper is as follows: Section 1.1 has a list of assumptions and conventions used throughout the work and which help to use the tables. Section 2 contains the lookup tables, including one for Fresnel zone radius. Derivations can be found in the Supplementary Material: Section S1 contains the derivations for surface geometries. Section S2 covers subsurface geometries. Section S3 covers pulse limited surface and subsurface geometries. Section S4 covers passive radar sounding for surface targets. Finally, Section S5 contains derivations for bistatic geometries and bistatic Fresnel zones.

1.1. Using the tables

The following assumptions and conventions apply to the radar equations, geometries and derivations that are summarized in the tables in Section 2:

  1. 1. Radar equations give single-pulse raw received power. Processing gains, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) resolution target area and system losses are not included.

  2. 2. Distances between sensors and targets are assumed large compared to the wavelength. Most derivations rely on large-argument/small-angle approximations.

  3. 3. All expressions for Fresnel zone radius, r f, in the table are approximations.

  4. 4. The medium above the surface interface is assumed to be free-space.

  5. 5. Angular dependence and polarization of backscatter, antenna gain, reflectivity or transmissivity are suppressed for clarity.

  6. 6. Subsurface media are assumed lossless. Propagation losses can be included as needed.

  7. 7. Interfaces to which reflectivity, Γ, and transmissivity, T, apply should be understood in context.

  8. 8. Surface phase integrals implicitly start from the assumption of Kirchhoff scattering.

  9. 9. Any occurrence of reflectivity, Γ, and transmissivity, T, can be augmented with higher-fidelity scattering models that are proportional to reflectivity or transmissivity. For example, the exponential form of coherence loss derived under the Kirchhoff approximation for small-roughness can be included at any interface.

  10. 10. Transmitter and receiver gain, G t and G r, are notated separately, rather than G 2, to accommodate bistatic geometries or systems that transmit and receive from different, but possibly co-located, antennas.

2. Tables of radar equations and fresnel zone radius

In all tables, subsurface is indicated with grey shading in the column Geometry, and new variants of equations, or those for which citations were not readily found, are noted with *** in the column Citation.

Table 1. Table of symbols

Table 2. Active sounding – surface

Table 3. Active sounding – subsurface

Table 4. Pulse limited

Table 5. Passive sounding

Table 6. Bistatic

Table 7. Fresnel zone radius

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/aog.2020.16.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks several people who contributed generous time and energy to carefully reading, editing and checking this work, which has greatly improved its substance, presentation and usefulness. Ilgin Seker (JPL) for reading a first draft and providing several insights; Dragana Perkovic-Martin (JPL) for reviewing an early draft; Dustin Schroeder (Stanford) for encouraging its publication as well as participation from his students: Riley Culberg (Stanford), Anna Broome (Stanford), Nicole Bienert (Stanford) and Sean Peters (Stanford), who each contributed numerous valuable suggestions and corrections, both detailed and nuanced, on content, style, references, table entries and figures. The author would also like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of the work and helpful improvements.

The research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This work was supported in part by the Europa Clipper Project. Government sponsorship acknowledged.

References

Biccari, D, Picardi, G, Seu, R and Melacci, P (2001) Mars surface models and subsurface detection performance in MARSIS. In Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2001. IGARSS’01. IEEE 2001 International, Sydney, Australia, 6, 2560–2562. IEEE. doi:10.1109/IGARSS.2001.978088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blankenship, DD, Young, DA, Moore, WB and Moore, JC (2009) Radar Sounding of Europa's Subsurface Properties and Processes: The View from Earth. Tucson, AZ: Europa University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Brown, G (1977) The average impulse response of a rough surface and its applications. IEEE Transactions on antennas and Propagation 25(1), 6774. doi:10.1109/JOE.1977.1145328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruzzone, Land 5 others (2011) Subsurface radar sounding of the Jovian moon Ganymede. Proceedings of the IEEE 99(5), 837857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruzzone, Land 9 others (2013) RIME: Radar for icy moon exploration. In Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2013 IEEE International, Melbourne, Australia, pages 3907–3910. IEEE. doi:10.1109/IGARSS.2013.6723686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreno-Luengo, H, Luzi, G and Crosetto, M (2018) Sensitivity of CYGNSS bistatic reflectivity and SMAP microwave radiometry brightness temperature to geophysical parameters over land surfaces. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing 12(1), 107122. doi:10.1109/JSTARS.2018.2856588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cecconi, Band 9 others (2012) Natural radio emission of Jupiter as interferences for radar investigations of the icy satellites of Jupiter. Planetary and Space Science 61(1), 3245. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2011.06.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chyba, CF, Ostro, SJ and Edwards, BC (1998) Radar detectability of a subsurface ocean on Europa. Icarus 134(2), 292302. doi:10.1006/icar.1998.5961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dall, Jand 9 others (2010) ESA's polarimetric airborne radar ice sounder (POLARIS): design and first results. IET Radar, Sonar & Navigation 4(3), 488496. doi:10.1049/iet-rsn.2009.0035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edison, A, Moore, R and Warner, B (1960) Radar terrain return measured at near-vertical incidence. IRE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 8(3), 246254. doi:10.1109/TAP.1960.1144843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fung, A and Eom, H (1983) Coherent scattering of a spherical wave from an irregular surface. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 31(1), 6872. doi:10.1109/TAP.1983.1142979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudmandsen, P (1971) Electromagnetic probing of ice. In Wait, JR ed. Electromagnetic probing in geophysics, Boulder, Colorado: Golem Press, 321.Google Scholar
Hajj, GA and Zuffada, C (2003) Theoretical description of a bistatic system for ocean altimetry using the GPS signal. Radio Science 38(5), 110. doi: 10.1029/2002RS002787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayne, G (1980) Radar altimeter mean return waveforms from near-normal-incidence ocean surface scattering. IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 28(5), 687692. doi:10.1109/TAP.1980.1142398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, MS, Chapin, E and Schroeder, DM (2018) Geometric power fall-off in radar sounding. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 56(11), 65716585. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2018.2840511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hélière, F, Lin, CC, Corr, H and Vaughan, D (2007) Radio echo sounding of pine island glacier, west antarctica: aperture synthesis processing and analysis of feasibility from space. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 45(8), 25732582. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2007.897433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlsson, NB, Rippin, DM, Vaughan, DG and Corr, HF (2009) The internal layering of Pine Island Glacier, West Antarctica, from airborne radar-sounding data. Annals of Glaciology 50(51), 141146. doi:10.3189/S0260305500250660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kofman, W, Orosei, R and Pettinelli, E (2010) Radar signal propagation and detection through ice. Space science reviews 153(1-4), 249271. doi:10.1007/s11214-010-9642-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, J (1986) Electromagnetic Wave Theory. Wiley: A Wiley-Interscience publication.Google Scholar
Levine, D (1984) The radar cross section of dielectric disks. IEEE transactions on antennas and propagation 32(1), 612. doi:10.1109/TAP.1984.1143180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, RK and Williams, C (1957) Radar terrain return at near-vertical incidence. Proceedings of the IRE 45(2), 228238. doi:10.1109/JRPROC.1957.278394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moussessian, A (2015) REASON for Europa. In 2015 AGU Fall Meeting, AGU.Google Scholar
Nguyen, C and Park, J (2016) Stepped-frequency Radar Sensors: Theory, Analysis and Design. AG, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ono, T and Oya, H (2000) Lunar Radar Sounder (LRS) experiment on-board the SELENE spacecraft. Earth, planets and space 52(9), 629637. doi:10.1186/BF03351671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, Gand 13 others (2017) Bistatic radar observations of the Moon using Mini-RF on LRO and the Arecibo Observatory. Icarus 283, 219. doi: 10.1016/j.icarus.2016.05.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, MEand 5 others (2007) Along-track focusing of airborne radar sounding data from west antarctica for improving basal reflection analysis and layer detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 45(9), 27252736. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2007.897416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, ME, Blankenship, DD and Morse, DL (2005) Analysis techniques for coherent airborne radar sounding: application to west antarctic ice streams. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 110(B6), 117. doi: 10.1029/2004JB003222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, ST, Schroeder, DM, Castelletti, D, Haynes, M and Romero-Wolf, A (2018) In situ demonstration of a passive radio sounding approach using the Sun for echo detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 56(12), 73387349. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2018.2850662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picardi, Gand 9 others (2004a) Performance and surface scattering models for the Mars Advanced Radar for Subsurface and Ionosphere Sounding (MARSIS). Planetary and Space Science 52(1), 149156. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2003.08.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picardi, Gand 9 others (2004b) MARSIS: Mars advanced radar for subsurface and ionosphere sounding. Wilson A and Chicarro A eds. Mars Express: The Scientific Payload. ESA SP-1240. Noordwijk, Netherlands: ESA Publications Division, 5169.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Morales, Fand 9 others (2013) Advanced multifrequency radar instrumentation for polar research. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 52(5), 28242842. doi:10.1109/TGRS.2013.2266415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romero-Wolf, Aand 5 others (2015) A passive probe for subsurface oceans and liquid water in Jupiter's icy moons. Icarus 248, 463477. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2014.10.043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, DMand 7 others (2016) Assessing the potential for passive radio sounding of Europa and Ganymede with RIME and REASON. Planetary and Space Science 134, 5260. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2016.10.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seu, Rand 9 others (2007) SHARAD sounding radar on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets 112(E5), 118. doi: 10.1029/2006JE002745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shi, Land 8 others (2010) Multichannel coherent radar depth sounder for NASA Operation Ice Bridge. In Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 2010 IEEE International, Honolulu, Hawaii, pages 1729–1732. IEEE. doi:10.1109/IGARSS.2010.5649518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsang, L, Kong, J and Ding, K (2000) Scattering of electromagnetic waves, vol. 1: Theory and applications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulaby, FTand 8 others (2014) Microwave radar and radiometric remote sensing. Vol. 4. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Ulaby, F, Moore, R and Fung, A (1982) Microwave remote sensing: active and passive. volume 2-radar remote sensing and surface scattering and emission theory.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Table of symbols

Figure 1

Table 2. Active sounding – surface

Figure 2

Table 3. Active sounding – subsurface

Figure 3

Table 4. Pulse limited

Figure 4

Table 5. Passive sounding

Figure 5

Table 6. Bistatic

Figure 6

Table 7. Fresnel zone radius

Supplementary material: File

Haynes supplementary material

Haynes supplementary material 1
Download Haynes supplementary material(File)
File 1.3 MB
Supplementary material: PDF

Haynes supplementary material

Haynes supplementary material 2
Download Haynes supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.1 MB