Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:57:43.118Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Concept and realization of a low-cost multi-target simulator for CW and FMCW radar system calibration and testing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 February 2018

Werner Scheiblhofer ,
Reinhard Feger ,
Andreas Haderer  and
Andreas Stelzer
Werner Scheiblhofer*
Affiliation:
Institute for Communications Engineering and RF-Systems, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Altenbergerstr. 69, Linz A-4040, Austria
Reinhard Feger
Affiliation:
Institute for Communications Engineering and RF-Systems, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Altenbergerstr. 69, Linz A-4040, Austria
Andreas Haderer
Affiliation:
Inras GmbH, Altenbergerstr. 69, A-4040 Linz, Austria
Andreas Stelzer
Affiliation:
Institute for Communications Engineering and RF-Systems, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Altenbergerstr. 69, Linz A-4040, Austria
*
Author for correspondence: Werner Scheiblhofer, Email: werner.scheiblhofer@jku.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We present the realization of an frequency-modulated continuous-wave radar target simulator, based on a modulated-reflector radar system. The simulator, designed for the 24 GHz frequency band, uses low-cost modulated-reflector nodes and is capable to simultaneously generate multiple targets in a real-time environment. The realization is based on a modular approach and thus provides a high scalability of the whole system. It is demonstrated that the concept is able to simulate multiple artificial targets, located at user-selectable ranges and even velocities, utilized within a completely static setup. The characterization of the developed hardware shows that the proposed concept allows to dynamically and precisely adjust the radar cross-section of each single target within a dynamic range of 50 dB. Additionally, the provided range-proportional target frequency bandwidth makes the system perfectly suitable for fast and reliable intermediate frequency-chain calibration of multi-channel radar systems. Within this paper we demonstrate the application of the concept for a linear sweeped frequency-modulated continuous-wave radar. The presented approach is applicable to any microwave-based measurement system using frequency differences between transmit- and receive signals for range- and velocity evaluation, such as (non-)linear sweeped as well as pure Doppler radar systems.

Keywords

Microwave measurementsRadarSystem calibration
Type
Research Papers
Information
International Journal of Microwave and Wireless Technologies , Volume 10 , Special Issue 2: EuCAP 2017 , March 2018 , pp. 207 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and the European Microwave Association 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Dahl, C, Rolfes, I and Vogt, M (2015) A two-dimensional radar simulator for level measurement of bulk material in silos. In German Microwave Conference., pp. 221–224.Google Scholar
2.Scheiblhofer, S, Treml, M, Schuster, S, Feger, R and Stelzer, A (2008) A versatile FMCW Radar System Simulator for Millimeter-Wave Applications. In Proceedingsof the European Microwave Conference, pp. 1604–1607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Tai, N, Chao, Wang and Naichang, Yuan (2016) A design of coherent moving target simulator for inverse synthetic aperture radar. In Proceedings of the Progress in Electromagnetic Research Symposium, pp. 2221–2225.Google Scholar
4.Ergezer, H, Keskin, MF and Gunay, O (2014) Hardware-In-the-Loop Radar Test Simulator. In Proceedings of the Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications, pp. 666–673.Google Scholar
5.Lutz, S, Erhart, C, Walte, T and Weigel, R (2014) Target simulator concept for chirp modulated 77 GHz automotive radar sensors. In Proceedings of the European Radar Conf., pp. 65–68.Google Scholar
6.Engelhardt, M, Pfeiffer, F and Biebl, E (2016) A high bandwidth radar target simulator for automotive radar sensors. In Proceedings of the European Radar Conference, pp. 245–248.Google Scholar
7.(2016) E8707A Radar Target Simulator 76 GHz to 77 GHz. [Online]. Available at http://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5992-1648EN.pdf?id=2798970.Google Scholar
8.Groschel, P, Zarei, S, Carlowitz, C, Lipka, M, Sippel, E, Ali, A, Weigel, R, Schober, R and Vossiek, M (2017) A system concept for online calibration of massive MIMO transceiver arrays for communication and localization. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques 65(5), 1735–1750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Scheiblhofer, W, Feger, R, Haderer, A and Stelzer, A (2017) A low-cost multi-target simulator for FMCW radar system calibration and testing. In Proceedings of the European Microwave Conference , in press.Google Scholar
10.Miesen, R, Ebelt, R, Kirsch, F, Schafer, T, Li, G, Wang, H and Vossiek, M (2011) Where is the tag? IEEE Microwave Magazine 12(7), 49–63.Google Scholar
11.Stove, AG (1992) Linear FMCW radar techniques. IEE Proceedings F. Radar Signal Processing 5(139), 343–350.Google Scholar
12.Pozar, DM (2012) Microwave Engineering, 4th edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
13.Sharp, E and Diab, M (1960) Van Atta reflector array. IRE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation 8(4), 436–438.Google Scholar
14.Fink, P, Kennedy, T and Lin, G (2013) Extended range passive wireless tag system and method. Google Patents.Google Scholar
15.Hoogeboom, P, Elferink, F and Trampuz, C (2009) Development of a switching passive 2.4 GHz RFID transponder on flexible substrate, in Proceedings of the European Microwave Conference, pp. 165–168.Google Scholar
16.Jeffrey, A and Dai, H-H (2008) Handbook of Mathematical Formulas and Integrals, 4th edn. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
17.White, R, Cantrell, B, McConnell, J and Alter, J. (2004) Delta-sigma waveform generation for digital radars. In Proceedings of the IEEE Radar Conference, pp. 154–156.Google Scholar