IRJET- Performance Analysis of Phased Array, Mimo and Phased-Mimo Radars

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 03 | Mar-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 2782
PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF PHASED ARRAY, MIMO AND PHASED
-MIMO RADARS
A. MAHESH BABU1, CH. PAVAN KUMAR2, A. SRILEKHA3, B. SWATHI4, T. JYOSHNA5,
U. TEJOKUMARI6
1Assistant Professor of Electronics and Communication Engineering Gayatri Vidya Parishad College for Degree and
PG Courses School of Engineering, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
2,3,4,5,6Students of Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering Gayatri Vidya Parishad College for
Degree and PG Courses School of Engineering, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - We introduce a new technique for multiple-input
multiple-output (MIMO) radar with closely spaced antennas
which we call phased-MIMO radar. The new technique enjoys
the advantages of the MIMO radar without losing the main
advantage of the phased-array radar, that is scanning the
targets almost instantaneously by using electronic switching
for beam steering at the transmitting side. The theme of the
proposed technique is to partition the transmit arrayintosub-
arrays that are allowed to overlap. Then, each sub-array is
used to transmit a waveform which is orthogonal to the
waveforms transmitted by other sub-arrays. Also, the sub-
arrays are combined jointly to form a MIMO radarresultingin
higher angular resolution capabilities. The improvements
offered by the phased-MIMO radar technique when compared
to the phased-array and MIMO radar techniques are
demonstrated mathematically and by simulations through
analyzing the respective beam-patterns andtheoutputsignal-
to- noise-plus- interference ratios. These results show that the
proposed phased-MIMO radar is better when compared to
MIMO and phased-MIMO radars.
Key Words: MIMO, phased array radar, beam-forming,
phased MIMO radar, waveform diversity.
1. INTRODUCTION
Radar was initially designed for defense applications.Dueto
the applicability of radars for a variety of uses ranging from
micro-scale radars applied in biomedical engineering to
macro-scale radars used in radio-astronomy the quest for
new radar techniques has begun. To date, previous
developments in radar were based on the ideathatthetarget
can be tracked instantaneously by using electronic beam
steering. The corresponding radar technique is well known
as phased-array radar.
In the last decade, the development of a new radartechnique
that is best known as multiple-inputmultiple-output(MIMO)
radar has become the focus of intensive research. The
concept of the MIMO radar is to employ multiple antennas
for emitting several orthogonal waveforms and multiple
antennas for receiving the echoesreflectedbythetarget.The
concept of transmission of multiple orthogonal waveforms
from different antenna’s, is usually termed as the waveform
diversity.
Recently, some attempts to exploit jointly the benefits of the
phased-array and MIMO radars have been also reported. In
[4], a general antenna configuration is considered where
several well - separated sub-arrays are used to form aMIMO
radar with each sub-array operating in phased-array mode.
In [5], the idea of dividing the aperture of the transmit array
with co-located antennasinto multipledisjointsubapertures
has been introduced. Utilizing the same partitioning
structure, the authorsof [6]–[8] have developedclosed-form
expressions for MIMO signal sets to achieve wide transmit
beam-pattern.
In this paper, we consider a radar system with co-located
antennas and introduce transmit array partitioning to
integrate the phased-array radar into the MIMO radar.
Indeed, as compared to the phased-array radar, the use of
MIMO radar with co-located antennas enables improving
angular resolution, increasing the number of detectable
targets, improves parameter identification, extending the
array aperture by virtual sensors, and enhancing the
flexibility for transmit/receive beam-pattern design. The
MIMO radar with co-located antennas may suffer from
beam-shape loss which leads to performance degradation.
Moreover, the MIMO radar exhibits loss in the signal-to-
noise ratio (SNR) gain.
To overcome these demerits of the MIMO radar, we develop
a new radar technique which combinestheadvantagesofthe
MIMO radar (such as waveform diversity) with the
advantages of the phased-array radar (such as Beam
steering). In order to enable this possibility, we partitionthe
transmit array into a number of sub-arrays that are allowed
to overlap. Then, each sub-array is used to transmit a
waveform which is orthogonal to thewaveformstransmitted
by other sub-arrays. In parallel, the sub-arraysarecombined
jointly to form a MIMO radar resulting in higher angular
resolution capabilities.
The advantages of the new radar technique, called phased-
MIMO radar when compared to the phased-array and MIMO
radars are analyzed in terms of the corresponding beam-
pattern and signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratios(SINRs)
expressions.

Particularly, the new radar technique:
i) Enjoys all the advantagesof the MIMO radar, i.e., it enables
improving angular resolution, detecting a higher number of
targets, improving parameter identification, and extending
the array aperture;
ii) Enables the use of existing beam-forming techniques at
both the transmitting and the receiving ends;
iii) Provides the means for designing the overall beam-
pattern of the virtual array;
iv) Offers a tradeoff between angular resolution and
robustness against beam-shape loss;
v) Offers improved robustness against strong interference.
The simulations are based on the analysis of the phased-
MIMO radar with transmit/receive beam-forming.
Particularly, we derive the phased-MIMO radar beam-
pattern for the case when conventional transmit/receive
beam-forming is used, and compare it with the beam-
patterns of the phased-array and MIMO radars.
Also we compare the above mentioned radar techniques in
terms of their achievable output SINRs. The possibility of
using robust/adaptive beam-forming is also discussed.
2. PHASED-MIMO RADAR
The main idea behind our formulations is to partition the
transmit array into ‘K’ sub-arrays (1 <= K <= M) which are
allowed to overlap. In general, each transmit sub-array can
be composed of any number of antennasrangingfrom1toM
such that no sub-array is exactly the same as another sub-
array, with each sub-array consisting of M-K+1 array
elements.
3. SIMULATIONS
In our simulations, we consider a uniform array of M=10
omnidirectional antennas used for transmitting the
baseband waveforms, and N=10 omnidirectional antennas
spaced half a wavelength apart from each other at the
receiving end.
In all our simulation examples we compare our phased-
MIMO radar with the phased-array radar and the MIMO
radar. For the phased-MIMO radar, we alwaysusedK=5sub-
arrays which are assumed to be fully overlapped.
3.1. Non-adaptive Transmit/ReceiveBeam-forming
Example-1: Non-adaptive Transmit/Receive Beam-
pattern Without Spatial Transmit Aliasing: In the first
example, we examine the transmit/receive beam-pattern of
the transmit/receive beam-former, for the case when the
transmit antennas are located half a wavelength apart,
i.e., = 0.5 wavelength. Figs.1 and 2 show the transmit
beam-patterns and the waveform diversity beam-patterns,
respectively, for all three radar techniques tested, while Fig.
3 shows the overall transmit/receive beam-patterns for the
same techniques.
Fig-1.First example: transmit beam-patterns using
conventional beam-former ( =0.5 wavelength).
From Fig. 1, we can see that the phased-array radar has the
typical conventional beam-pattern with main-lobe centered
at θswhile the MIMO radar hasflat (0 dB) transmitting gain.
On the other hand, the phased-MIMO transmitbeam-pattern
is characterized by the aperture (actual size) of the
individual sub-arrays. Since the aperture of the sub-arraysis
always smaller than the aperture of the whole array, the
transmit beam-pattern of thephased-MIMOradarrepresents
a tradeoff between the beam-patterns of the MIMO and
phased-array radars. Aswe can see in Fig. 1, the reductionin
the sub-array aperture results in the beam-pattern of the
phased-MIMO radar with a wider main beam and a little
higher side-lobe levels as compared to the beam-pattern of
the phased-array radar. This small loss in beam-pattern
shape is repaid at a greater gain in the waveform diversity
beam-pattern as shown in Fig. 2.
Fig-2.First example: waveform diversity beam-patterns
using conventional beam-former ( =0.5 wavelength)

It is noted from Fig.2 that the phased-array radar has no
waveform diversity gain (0 dB flat pattern), while the
waveform diversity beam-patterns of the MIMOandphased-
MIMO radars are equivalent to conventional beam-patterns
offered by an M and K elements virtual arrays, respectively.
Fig-3.First example: overall beam-patterns using
conventional transmit/receive beam-former ( = 0.5
wavelength).
However, one can see in Fig.3 that the overall
transmit/receive beam-pattern shape for the proposed
phased-MIMO radar is significantly improved as compared
to the beam-patterns of the phased-array and MIMO radars.
Example-2: Non-adaptive Transmit/Receive Beam-
pattern With Spatial Transmit Aliasing: In this example,
we investigate the non-adaptive transmit/receive beam-
pattern for the case when the transmit antennas are located
more than a half wavelength apart from each other. In
particular, the case =2.5 is chosen andthecorresponding
non-adaptive beam-forming based beam-patterns for the
phased-array, MIMO, and phased-MIMO radars are plotted.
In this case, the transmit beam-patterns for all
aforementioned techniques have similar trends to their
counterparts in Fig. 1 except that, due to spatial aliasing in
the transmit mode, each beam-pattern is repeated fivetimes
within the spatial domain. The reason is that the inter-
element spacing is five times half a wavelength, i.e., five
times the critical spatial sampling spacing. Similarly, the
diversity beam-patterns also exhibit spatial aliasing for all
the techniques tested. The overall transmit/receive beam-
pattern is shown in Fig. 4.
Fig-4.Second example: overall beam-patterns using
conventional transmit/receive beam-former ( =2.5
wavelength).
It can be seen from this figure that the phased-array and
MIMO radarshave exactly the same transmit/receive beam-
patterns, while the proposed phased-MIMO radar beam-
pattern enjoys much lower side-lobe levels as compared to
the beam-patterns of the other radar techniques. Hence, the
proposed phased-MIMO radar is shown to offer a much
better overall performance.
Example-3: Non-adaptive Output SINR: In this example,
the non-adaptive beam-former output SINR is tested versus
SNR for different INR values. Fig.5 shows the output SINR
versus SNR for the phased-array, MIMO, and phased-MIMO
radars.
Fig-5.Third example: non-adaptive transmit/receive
output SINRs versus SNR at fixed INR= 30 dB
It can be seen from the figure that the output SINR for the
phased-array and MIMO radars are almost the same. This
observation agrees with the fact that both techniques have
the same side-lobe attenuation level and, therefore, havethe
same interference rejection capabilities. On the other hand,
the phased-MIMO radar has a much higher output SINR as

compared to both the phased-array and MIMO radars. Fig. 6
shows the output SINR versus SNR while the INR is fixed to
30 dB
Fig-6.Third example: non-adaptive transmit/receive
output SINRs versus SNR at fixed INR= -30 dB
It can be seen from the figure that the phased-array radar
output SINR is ten times higher than the MIMO radar output
SINR.
Example-4: Non-adaptive Output SINRinthePresenceof
Spatially Distributed Interference: In this example, we
assume one spatially distributed interference source which
is uniformly spread over the spatial sector. Fig.7 shows the
output SINR versus SNR where the INR is varied.
Fig-7.Fourth example: non-adaptive transmit/receive
output SINRs versus INR = SNR; spatially distributed
interference.
It can be seen from the figure that at low SNR the phased-
array radar output SINR is higher than the MIMO radar
output SINR. At low SNR values, the output SINR of the
phased-MIMO radar is comparable to the output SINR of the
phased-array radar which coincides with our theoretical
founding.
3.2. Adaptive Transmit/Receive Beam-forming
Example 5: MVDR Beam-forming Employing Multiple
Transmit Multiple Receive Antenna’s: In thisexample,the
MVDR receive beam-forming is used for the phased-array,
MIMO, and phased-MIMO radars. All simulationparameters
are the same as in Example 1.The receive MVDR beam-
pattern is shown in Fig.8 for all radar techniques tested.
Fig-8.Fifth example: overall beam-patterns using MVDR
beam-former ( =0.5 wavelength).
It can be observed from this figure that all radar techniques
exhibit nulls at the locations of the powerful interference.
This means that the phased-MIMO radar has almost the
same robustness against sensor noise as the phased-array
radar. At the same time, it enjoys the advantages of the
MIMO radar, e.g., waveform diversity.
Fig.9 shows the optimal SINR as well as the MVDR output
SINR versus SNR (INR is fixed to 30 dB) for all radar
techniques tested.
Fig-9.Fifth example: output SINRs versus SNR, N=10
receive antennas spaced half wavelength apart.

From this figure, we can see that the phased-MIMO radar
exhibits SINR performance that is very close to the phased-
array SINR performance.
Example 6: MVDR Beam-forming Employing Multiple
Transmit Single Receive Antenna’s: The same scenario as
in Example 5 is considered here except that the number of
receive antennas is N=1.The MVDR beam-former is used for
the MIMO and phased-MIMO radar techniques and the
MVDR beam-patterns are plotted in Fig. 10 for INR=50 dB
Fig-10.Sixth example: overall beam-patterns using MVDR
beam-former, N=1 receive antenna.
Fig.10 demonstrates that the proposed phased-MIMO radar
enjoys the advantages of phased-array and MIMO radars
and, therefore, is superior to both.
Fig.11 shows the optimal SINRs as well as the MVDR output
SINRs versus SNR (INR is fixed to 30 dB) for all radar
techniques tested.
Fig-11.Sixth example: output SINRs versus SNR, N=1
receive antenna.
The phased-MIMO radar exhibitsthe SINR performancethat
is superior to the performance of both the phased-array and
MIMO radars. This gain is attributed to the ability of the
phased-MIMO radar to reject interference combinedwithits
robustness against sensor noise.
4. CONCLUSION
This newly proposed technique for MIMO is based on
partitioning the transmit array to a number of sub-arrays
which are allowed to overlap. Each sub-array is used to
transmit a waveform which is orthogonal to the waveforms
transmitted by other sub-arrays. The sub-arrays are
combined jointly to form a MIMO radar resulting in higher
angular resolution capabilities. It isshownthattheproposed
technique has the advantages of both phased-array and
MIMO radars and, therefore, it has a superior performance.
Simulation results confirmour theoretical observations and
demonstrate the effectivenessoftheproposedphased-MIMO
radar technique. This new phased-MIMO radar technique
paves way for developments in MIMO radar. Some new
problems highlighted in the paper are the transmit beam-
forming and transmit sub-array waveform designs, which
satisfy certain desired properties.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was supported by Mr. A. Mahesh Babu, Asst.
Prof., B. Tech., M. Tech. We thank our sir, friends from
Gayatri Vidya Parishad College for Degree and PG Courses
School Of Engineering who provided insight and expertise
towards Phased MIMO radar which combine’s the merits of
both phased and MIMO radars. We would also like to thank
all others who helped us in doing this project.
REFERENCES
[1] M. I. Skolnik, Introduction to Radar Systems, 3rd ed.
New York: Mc-Graw-Hill, 2001.
[2] I. Immoreev and T.-H. Tao, “UWB radar for patient
monitoring,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 23,
pp. 11–18, Nov. 2008.
[3] E. Fishler, A. Haimovich, R. Blum, D. Chizhik, L. Cimini,
and R.Valenzuela, “MIMO radar: An idea whose timehas
come,” in Proc.IEEE Radar Conf., Honolulu, HI, Apr.
2004, vol. 2, pp. 71–78
[4] L. Xu and J. Li, “Iterative generalized-likelihoodratiotest
for MIMO radar,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol.55,no.
6, pp. 2375–2385, Jun. 2007.
[5] J. Bergin, S. McNeil, L. Fomundam, and P. Zulch, “MIMO
phased-array for SMTI radar,” in Proc. IEEE Aerospace
Conf., Big Sky, MT, Mar. 2008, pp. 1–7.
[6] J. P. Browning, D. R. Fuhrmann, and M. Rangaswamy, “A
hybrid MIMO phased-array concept for arbitraryspatial
beampattern synthesis,” in Proc. IEEE Digital Signal

Processing Signal Processing Education Workshop
(DSP/SPE), Marco Island, FL, Jan. 2009, pp. 446–450.
[7] D. Fuhrmann, P. Browning, and M. Rangaswamy,
“Constant-moduluspartially correlatedsignaldesignfor
uniform linear and rectangular MIMO radar arrays,” in
Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Waveform Diversity Design (WDD),
Orlando, FL, Feb. 2009, pp. 197–201.
[8] D. Fuhrmann, P. Browning, and M. Rangaswamy,
“Signaling strategiesfor the hybrid MIMO phased-array
radar,” IEEE J. Sel. Topics Signal Process., vol. 4,no.1,pp.
66–78, Feb. 2010.
[9] A. Hassanien and S. A. Vorobyov, “Direction finding for
MIMO radar with colocated antennas using transmit
beamspace preprocessing,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Workshop
Comp. Advanc. in Multi-Sensor Adapt. Process.
(CAMSAP’09), Dutch Antilles, Aruba, Dec.2009,pp.181–
184.
[10] J. Li and P. Stoica, “MIMO radar with colocated
antennas,” IEEE Signal Process. Mag., vol. 24, pp. 106–
114, Sep. 2007.
[11] A. Hassanien, S. A. Vorobyov, and K. M. Wong, “Robust
adaptive beamforming using sequential programming:
An iterative solution to the mismatch problem,” IEEE
Signal Process. Lett., vol. 15, pp.733–736, 2008.
[12] D. Fuhrmann and G. Antonio, “Transmit beamforming
for MIMO radar systemsusing signal cross-correlation,”
IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 44, pp.171–186,
Jan. 2008.
[13] A. Maio and M. Lops, “Design principles of MIMO radar
detectors,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 43,
pp. 886–898, Jul. 2007.
[14] S. M. Alamouti, “A simple transmitter diversity scheme
for wireless communications,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas
Commun., vol. 16, pp. 1451–1458, Oct. 1998.
[15] D. Tse and P.Viswanath, Fundamentals of Wireless
Communication. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ.
Press, 2005.

IRJET- Performance Analysis of Phased Array, Mimo and Phased-Mimo Radars

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to IRJET- Performance Analysis of Phased Array, Mimo and Phased-Mimo Radars (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Performance Analysis of Phased Array, Mimo and Phased-Mimo Radars