Analysis of Range Ambiguity Suppression in SAR by Up and

Down Chirp Modulation for Point and Distributed Targets

Josef Mittermayer; Jos Mrquez Martnez
Deutsches Zentrum fr Luft- und Raumfahrt (DLR)
IHR, 82234 Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany
T: +49-8153-28-2373, E-Mail: josef.mittermayer@dlr.de

AbstractThis Paper provides a demonstrative derivation of the 1

effect of up and down chirp modulation on point and extended Fup (f ) = exp+ j f 2 (3)
k
target signals. Analysis has been performed with respect to signal
amplitude, signal extension, modulation rate and phase behavior. The multiplication of the down chirp spectra with the up chirp
The suppression of point target range ambiguities is investigated filter results in:
for the a possible TerraSAR-X parameter setting. Extended targets

have been simulated and filtered. A Range-Ambiguity Simulator is exp j
4 f 2 2
R defocus (f ) =
under development which is based on airborne X-band data from (4)
rect exp + j f
the Experimental SAR (E-SAR) of DLR. The simulator concept is k k T
p k
presented.
Keywords: Range Ambiguity Suppression, Range Ambiguity and the inverse Fourier into time domain results in:
1 t k 2
rdefocus (t ) =
Simulator, Up- and Down Chirp Coding
rect exp j t (5)
I. INTRODUCTION 2 2 T
p 2
Abstract R.O. Harger presented in 1970 fundamentals and The result is a down chirp with the following characteristics
theoretical analysis on ambiguities [1]. He showed that there is compared to the transmitted chirp signal in ( 1 ):
no ambiguity suppression on extended targets for up and down amplitude is lowered by 1/sqrt(2) which equals to 3 dB
chirp modulation. However, the idea of range ambiguity sup- in intensity
pression by alternating up and down chirp modulation is often the duration of the signal is doubled to 2Tp
discussed since it is obvious and easy to implement. the modulation rate is halved to k/2
The method to reduce range ambiguities by sending alter- the phase center is identical
nately up and a down chirp signals was also investigated in [2].
In this reference, a theoretical analysis as well as simulation The filtering of an up chirp with a down chirp filter was simu-
work has been performed to maximize the ratio between the lated as described above based on the TerraSAR-X like pa-
auto-correlation of a pulse and the cross-correlation of the suc- rameters [5], [6] in TABLE I. The generated down chirp is
ceeding orthogonal pulse. Here, a more practical derivation is shown figure 1 together with the result of the mismatched fil-
carried out, performed by filtering in frequency domain, which tering. The halved modulation rate and the identical phase cen-
gives a better practical understanding of the problem and is ter can be observed on the right hand side plots, which are
closer to the practical implementations of currently used proc- zoomed versions of the plots on the left.
essing algorithms. The principle of stationary phase is used, TABLE I. TERRASAR LIKE PARAMETERS FOR SIMULATION
which is also the basis in the derivation of several well-known Typical PRF stripmap 3500 Hz
processing algorithms like wavenumber or chirp scaling. Duty cycle 18 %
Typical pulse length stripmap 50 us
II. ANALYTICAL ANALYSIS OF MISMATCHED CHIRP FILTERING Pulse bandwidth 150 MHz
Complex sampling frequency 165 MHz
Starting with a transmitted down-chirp signal:
t
[
sdown (t ) = rect exp j k t 2 ] (1)
Tp
with range time t, pulse length Tp and modulation rate k, the
transformation into frequency domain by applying the principle
of stationary phase [3] results in:

exp j
4 f 1 2
Sdown (f ) = rect exp + j f (2)
k k T
p k

The filter function for a transmitted up chirp signal is:

Figure 1. (left) Down chirp and result after filtering with up chirp filter
(right) Zoom into phase center

This work was partially performed during the SAFARI-Study, which was
financed by DLR and performed in co-operation with ASTRIUM , Germany

0-7803-7929-2/03/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE 4077

0-7803-7930-6/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE

For comparison, the result of the correct filtering of the down j 1 x =
sin[ k Tp x ]
chirp in frequency domain is: runamb (t ) = exp 1(t x ) dx (9)
4 k x = x
j
k Tp sinc[ k Tp t ]
irf ( t ) = exp 2
(6) using the substitution a=kTpx and the definite integral sinus,
4 e.g. see [4], runamb(t) results in:
where kTp2 is the compression gain. j j
2 exp a = sin[a] exp ( 10 )
4 k T 4
runamb ( t ) = =
p

III. AMBIGUITY SUPPRESSION FOR POINT TARGETS k

a
a =0
da
k Tp k
To estimate the compression gain for point targets the raw data
signal of a point target (up chirp) and an ambiguous target (down Considering the convolution, the result is valid for a full over-
chirp) were combined and then compressed by a down chirp fil- lap of the extended target with the sinc-function. Assuming the
ter. Only one range look is used and the full pulse bandwidth of width of the sinc-function to be the distance between the first
150 MHz is processed. Figure 2 shows (left, on top) the result, two zero positions, the result is valid within:
which is the IRF of the point target on top the defocused signal of Tunamb 1 T 1
the ambiguous target. A zoom is provided on the right side. The + t unamb ( 11 )
2 k Tp 2 k Tp
intensity difference between the compressed and the decom-
pressed chirp signal is the compression gain or time bandwidth The result in ( 10 ) can be summarized as follows:
product of the point target of 38.75 dB, added to the 3 dB sup- the amplitude is constant 1/sqrt(k) and only dependent on k
pression due to the mismatch filtering of the ambiguous chirp phase shift of -/4 with respect to the extended target
signal. This results in 41.75 dB as can be seen in figure 2. For
comparison, the compressed point target without the presence of B. Calculation of Mis-Matched Filtered Extended Target
an ambiguous target is shown on bottom of figure2. Using the result of the mismatched point target filtering, the result
of mismatched filtering of an ambiguous extended target is the
convolution of the extended target with the chirp signal of ( 5 ):
t 1 t k 2
ramb (t ) = rect rect exp j t ( 12 )
Tamb 2 2 T
p 2

This can be considered as coherent addition of shifted chirp

signals with half the modulation rate of the transmitted chirp
signals. Assuming an extended target with more than twice the
length of the transmitted pulse, the calculation of the correla-
tion integral can be divided into three sections:
Tamb T T T
(I) Tp t amb + Tp (II) amb + Tp t + amb Tp
2 2 2 2
Tamb Tamb
( 13 )
(III) + Tp t + + Tp
2 2

Figure 2. Compressed combined raw signal with filter for up and down chirp In the following, we only evaluate section (II), which is char-
(top) and up chirp compressed with up chirp filter (bottom) acterized by a full overlap of the two rect-functions in ( 12 ).
T
+ amb T
IV. MISMATCHED FILTERING FOR EXTENDED TARGETS 1 2
k 2
ramb (t ) = exp j (t x ) dx ( 14 )
Here, extended targets are simply modeled being an array of 2 Tamb + T
p
2
point targets with same amplitude and phase, and an extension 2

Tamb. The received signal eunamb(t) of a wanted target and k

exp j t 2 + Tamb T
2
kx
exp j x 2 exp[j k x t ]dx ; x' =
eamb(t) of an ambiguous target is generated by convoluting a 2 k
=
rect-function with a down and an up chirp, respectively: 2 T 2 2
amb + T p
2

t k
exp[ j k t 2 ] rect
t exp j t 2
eunamb (t ) = rect
Tamb k
+ 2 Tp 2
(7)

exp j x'2 exp[j 2 x't ] dx'

2 2 2
Tunamb Tp =
2 k Tamb k k
+ T
p 2
t t
exp[+ j k t 2 ] rect
2

eamb (t ) = rect (8) The integral is the backward Fourier transform of a chirp sig-
Tamb Tp nal, and is solved by the principle of stationary phase:
A. Calculation of Matched Filtered Extended Target Response
Using the result of the matched point target filtering given in k
exp j t 2 exp j
2 2 k k 4
equation ( 6 ), the result of mismatched filtering of the return r amb (t ) = exp j exp j t 2 =
2 k 2 4 2 k
signal of a wanted extended target is directly the convolution of
the extended target with the impulse response function in ( 6 ). ( 15 )
The convolution integral can be written to be:

0-7803-7929-2/03/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE 4078

0-7803-7930-6/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE

The result in section (II) is the following:
the amplitude is constant 1/sqrt(k) and only dependent on k
phase shift by -/4 with respect to the extended target
The result of the matched and of the mismatched filtering (con-
sidering up and down chirp signals) is identical in the area of
the extended target.
airborne raw data is not possible due to the small swath width
of airborne data with respect to satellite borne SAR systems.
After transforming the ambiguous raw data back into time
domain, they are coherently added to the raw data selected for
the unambiguous region, which is the last stage in the range
ambiguity simulation.

raw data for raw data for raw data for

V. RANGE AMBIGUITY SIMULATOR ambiguous unambiguous ambiguous
In order to estimate the range ambiguity suppression, e.g. region region region

by up and down chirp coding, a range ambiguity simulator has

been developed. The aim of this simulator is to introduce am-
biguous signals into airborne range ambiguity free raw data range range
and to achieve ambiguous raw data representative for Ter- compression compression

raSAR-X. This allows to identify the range ambiguities well in

the processed image and to analyze ambiguity reduction meth-
amplitude amplitude
ods, e.g. the up and down chirp coding. weighting weighting

A. Analysis of Ambiguous Signal after Image Processing

Range ambiguity signals are received at the same time as range de- range de-
compression compression
the wanted signal but are echoes from succeeding or preceding
pulses and thus, from different range distances, e.g. [7]. This
wrong range positioning of the ambiguous signals in the raw azimuth azimuth
data results in a wrong correction of the range cell migration defocussing defocussing
in frequency in frequency
(RCM) and an azimuth defocusing of the ambiguous signals. domain domain
Range compression does not introduce a defocusing since it is
range invariant. For TerraSAR-X parameters and a low Dop-
pler centroid, the error due to wrong RCM correction is smaller
than one range resolution cell and can thus be neglected in the
+
ambiguity simulator. The azimuth defocusing depends on the
Doppler rate which varies with range. Since the azimuth filter- raw data with range
ing step is adapted only to the desired signal there is a consid- ambiguities
erable defocusing of the ambiguities.
Figure 3. Concept of Range Ambiguity Simulator based on airborne raw data

B. Simulator Concept VI. DISCUSSION

Figure 3 shows the block diagram of the range ambiguity
simulator. The starting point are airborne X-band data from the
Experimental SAR of DLR (ESAR). X-band raw data from one
acquisition are split into several parts in azimuth direction, one
part will be used for processing the desired image and the other
parts are used to generate the ambiguous data. The different
parts have to be sufficient far away from each other for not
being correlated.
The first step is to range compress the raw data for the am-
biguous regions. The range compressed signals are then
weighted according to the calculated strength of the range am-
biguities. The calculation is based on the radar equation (slant
range, incidence angle, backscattering coefficient), the range
antenna pattern and a timing analysis. After the weighting, the
data are de-compressed in range.
Next, a filter is applied in azimuth direction in azimuth fre-
quency domain. The filter changes the Doppler rate according
to the slant range position of the ambiguity to be introduced.
Note, since the unambiguous raw data and the raw data for the
generation of the ambiguous signals are not shifted in slant
range, this change of the Doppler rate is required. A simple
selection of the raw data for the ambiguous signal generation at
more far range or near range positions in the range compressed
A demonstrative derivation for point and extended target
ambiguities after processing has been presented for up- and
down chirp coding. Point target ambiguities can be suppressed
efficiently but the processing result for matched and mis-
matched filtering of extended ambiguous signals is identical
and no ambiguity reduction can be achieved. A simulator for
range ambiguities is built up in order to investigate the advan-
tages and disadvantages of an up and down chirp coding for
applications oriented to point target detection or to extended
target analysis.
REFERENCES
[1] R.O. Harger: Synthetic Aperture Radar Systems: Theory and Design,
Academic Press, New York, 1970.
[2] Ulrich Stein: Untersuchung von Verfahren zum Einsatz von digital
Beamforming in der Fernerkundung, Diplomarbeit an der Universitt
Karlsruhe, Insitut fr Hchstfrequenztechnik und Elektronik, 15. April 2002.
[3] Rihaczek A.W.:Principles of high resolution radar, McGraw-Hill, 1969.
[4] Dr.-Ing. Wilhelm Leupold: Analysis fr Ingenieure, Verlag Harri Deutsch,
Thun und Frankfurt/Main, 1989, ISBN 3-87144-103-1.
[5] M. Suess, S. Riegger , W. Pitz, R. Werninghaus: TERRASAR-X De-
sign and Performance, Proc. of EUSAR2002, Kln, Germany.
[6] J. Mittermayer, V. Alberga, S. Buckreu, S. Riegger: TerraSAR-X:
Predicted Performance, Proc. of Spie 2002.
[7] J. C. Curlander and R.N. McDonough: "Synthetic Aperture Radar:
Systems and Signal Processing", New York, Wiley, 1991.

0-7803-7929-2/03/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE 4079

0-7803-7930-6/$17.00 (C) 2003 IEEE