Compensation of Adaptive Arrays - 10

Monzingo-7200014 book ISBN: XXXXXXXXXX November 24, 2010 19:46 373
C H A P T E R
10
Compensation of
Adaptive Arrays
'
&
$
%
Chapter Outline
10.1 Array Errors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374
10.2 Array Calibration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377
10.3 Broadband Signal Processing Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
10.4 Compensation for Mutual Coupling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396
10.5 Multipath Compensation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
10.6 Analysis of Interchannel Mismatch Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
10.7 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
10.8 Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416
10.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Narrowbandadaptivearraysneedonlyonecomplexadaptiveweightineachelementchan-
nel. Broadbandadaptivearrays, however, requiretappeddelay lines (transversal lters)
ineachelement channel tomakefrequency-dependent amplitudeandphaseadjustments.
Theanalysis presentedso far assumes that eachelement channel has identical electron-
ics andnoreectedsignals. Unfortunately, theelectrical characteristics of eachchannel
areslightlydifferent andleadtochannel mismatching inwhichsignicant differences
infrequency-responsecharacteristics fromchannel to channel may severely degradean
arraysperformancewithoutsomeformof compensation. Thischapterstartswithananal-
ysis of array errors and then addresses array calibration and frequency-dependent mis-
matchcompensationusingtappeddelaylineprocessing, whichisimportant for practical
broadbandadaptivearraydesigns.
Thenumber of taps used in atapped delay lineprocessor depends on whether the
tappeddelaylinecompensatesfor broadbandchannel mismatcheffectsor for theeffects
of multipathandnitearray propagationdelay. Minimizingthenumber of tapsrequired
for aspeciedset of conditionsisanimportant practical designconsideration, sinceeach
additional tap(andassociatedweighs) increasesthecost andcomplexity of theadaptive
arraysystem.
373
374 CHAPTER 10 Compensationof AdaptiveArrays
10.1 ARRAY ERRORS
Arrayerrorsresultfromthemanufacturingtolerancesdenedbythematerials, processes,
andconstructionof thecomponentsinanarray. Thesesmall errorsarerandom, becausethe
manufacturingtechniques employedhavevery tight tolerances. Therandomdifferences
between any components distort thesignal path by adding phaseand amplitudeerrors
as well as noiseto eachsignal. Thesetypes of errors arestatic, becauseoncemeasured
theyremainrelativelyunchangedover thelifeof thecomponent. Higher frequencieshave
tighter tolerances for phase distortion than lower frequencies, because the errors are a
functionof wavelength. Not only aretheaccuracy of thedimensionsof thecomponents
important, buttheaccuracyof thevaluesof theconstitutiveparametersof thecomponents
arealso important. For instance, thedielectric constant determines thewavelength and
hence the phase of the signal passing through it, so an error in the dielectric constant
producesaphaseerror.
Dynamic errors changewithtimeandareprimarily dueto changes intemperature.
Onlinecalibrationcorrectsforthesedynamicerrorsalsotakescareof anydriftinthestatic
errors. Thedynamic errorsarealsofrequency dependent. Theeffectsof temperatureare
smallest at thecenter frequency and increaseas thefrequency migrates away fromthe
center frequency.
10.1.1 Error Analysis
Randomerrorsthat affect arraysfall intofour categories:
1. Randomamplitudeerror,
a
n
2. Randomphaseerror,
p
n
3. Randompositionerror,
s
n
4. Randomelement failure, P
e
n
=
_
1 element functioningproperly
0 element failure
Therst threetypesof randomerrorst intothearrayfactor asperturbationstothearray
weightsandelement locations
AF
err
=
N
n=1
_
a
n
+
a
n
_
e
j (p
n
+
p
n)
e
j k(s
n
+
s
n
)u
(10.1)
Element failuresresult whenanelement nolonger transmitsor receives. Theprobability
thatanelementhasfailed, 1P
e
, isthesameasarootmeansquare(rms) amplitudeerror,
a
2
n
. Position errors arenot usually aproblem, so areasonableformulato calculatethe
rmssidelobelevel of thearrayfactor for amplitudeandphaseerrorswithelementfailures
is[1]
sll
rms
=
(1 P
e
) +
a
2
n
+ P
e
p
2
n
P
e
_
1
p
2
n
_
t
N
(10.2)
Figure10-1isanexampleof atypical corporate-fedarray. A randomerror thatoccurs
at one element is statistically uncorrelated with a randomerror that occurs in another
element inthearray as longas that error occurs after thelast T junctionandbeforean
10.1 ArrayErrors 375
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A
B
C
FIGURE 10-1
Corporate-fed array
with random errors.
50 0 50
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
5
10
q (degrees)
D
i
r
e
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
d
B
)
Errors
Error free
FIGURE 10-2
Array factor
with random,
uncorrelated errors
superimposed on
the error-free array
factor.
element. If arandomerror occursprior toA, for instance, thentherandomerror becomes
correlatedbetweentheelementsthatsharetheerror. For instance, arandomerror between
A and B results in arandomcorrelated error shared by elements 1 and 2. Likewise, a
randomerror betweenB andCresultsinarandomcorrelatederror sharedbyelements1,
2, 3, and4.
Asanexample, consider aneight-element, 20dB Chebyshevarraythat haselements
spaced/2apart. If therandomerrorsarerepresentedby
a
n
= 0.15and
p
n
= 0.15, then
anexampleof thearrayfactor witherrorsisshowninFigure10-2. Notethat therandom
errorslower themainbeamdirectivity, induceaslight beam-pointingerror, increasethe
sidelobelevels, andll insomeof thenulls.
10.1.2 Quantization Errors
PhaseshiftersandattenuatorshaveN
bp
control bitswiththeleastsignicantbitsgivenby
a
= 2
N
ba
(10.3)
p
= 2 2
N
bp
(10.4)
If thedifferencebetweenthedesiredandquantizedamplitudeweightsisauniformlydis-
tributedrandomnumber withtheboundsbeingthemaximumamplitudeerror of
a
/2,
then therms amplitudeerror is
a
n
=
a
/
12. Thequantization error is randomonly

when no two adjacent elements receivethesamequantized phaseshift. Thedifference
between thedesired and quantized phaseshifts is treated as uniformrandomvariables
between
p
/2. Aswiththeamplitudeerror, therandomphaseerror formulainthiscase
is
p
n
=
p
/
12. Substitutingthiserror into(b) yieldsthermssidelobelevel.

Thephasequantizationerrorsbecomecorrelatedwhenthebeamsteeringphaseshift
issmall enoughthatgroupsof adjacentelementshavetheirbeamsteeringphasequantized
to thesamelevel. This means that N/N
Q
subarrays of N
Q
elements receivethesame
phaseshift. Thegratinglobesduetothesesubarraysoccur at [2]
sin
m
= sin
s
m
N
Q
d
e
= sin
s
_
1
m(N 1) 2
N
bp
N
_
sin
s
_
1m2
N
bp
_
(10.5)
Theapproximation in (10.5) assumes that thearray has many elements. For largescan
angles, quantizationlobesdonot form, becausetheelement-to-element phasedifference
appearsrandom. Therelativepeaksof thequantizationlobesaregivenby[1]
AF
QL
N
=
1
2
N
p
1sin
2
_
1sin
2
s
(10.6)
Figure 10-3 shows an array factor with a 20 dB n = 3 Taylor amplitude taper for a
20-element, d = 0.5 array with its beamsteered to = 3
when the phase shifters

havethreebits. Four quantization lobes appear. Thequantization lobes decreasewhen
higher-precisionphaseshiftersareusedandwhenthebeamissteeredtohigher angles.
Signicant distortion also results frommutual coupling, variation in group delay
betweenlters, differencesinampliergain, toleranceinattenuatoraccuracy, andaperture
jitter inadigital beamformingarray. Aperturejitter isthetimingerror betweensamples
inananalog-to-digital (A/D) converter. Without calibration, beamformingor estimation
of the direction of arrival (DOA) of the signal is difcult, as the internal distortion is
uncorrelatedwiththesignal. Asaresult, theuncorrelateddistortionchangestheweights
at eachelement andthereforedistortsthearraypattern.
FIGURE 10-3
Array factor steered
to 3 degrees with
three-bit phase
shifters compared
with phase shifters
with innite
precision.
90 45 0 45 90
30
20
10
0
A
r
r
a
y

f
a
c
t
o
r

(
d
B
)
3 bit phase shifter
q (degrees)
10.2 ArrayCalibration 377
10.2 ARRAY CALIBRATION
Aphasedarrayneedscalibratedbeforeitcangenerateanoptimumcoherentbeam.Calibra-
tioninvolvestuning, for example, thephaseshifters, attenuators, or receiverstomaximize
thegainandtocreatethedesiredsideloberesponse. Ofinecalibrationtakescareof the
staticerrorsandisdoneatthefactoryorondeployment. Narrowbandcalibrationisapplied
atthecenterfrequencyof operation. Broadbandcalibrationisappliedoverthewholeoper-
atingbandwidthof thearray. Thecalibratedphasesettingsarestoredfor all beamsteering
angles. Temperaturecausesdrift inthecomponent characteristicsover time, sothearray
requiresperiodicrecalibration. Thegainof theradiofrequency(RF) channelsmustbeac-
curatelycontrolledtoavoidnonlinearitiesarisingfromsaturationof components, because
thesenonlinearitiescannot beremoved.
Thetopvector inFigure10-4showstheresultinguncalibratedarrayoutput whenthe
individual ve-elementvectorshaverandomamplitudeandphaseerrors. Whenthearrayis
calibrated(bottomvectorinFigure10-4), thentheindividual elementvectorsarethesame
lengthandalign. Asaresult, thecalibratedarrayoutput vector magnitudeismaximized,
andits phaseis zero. Methods for performingarray calibrationuseacalibratedsource,
signal injection, or near-eldscanning. Theseapproachesarediscussedinthefollowing
sections.
10.2.1 Calibrated Source
A knowncalibrationsourceradiates acalibrationsignal toall elements inthearray [3].
Figure10-5showsacalibrationsourceinthefar eldof anarray. Atregular intervals, the
mainbeamissteeredtoreceivethecalibrationsourcesignal. Alternatively, amultibeam
antennacandevoteonebeamtocalibration. Calibrationwithnear-eldsourcesrequires
that distanceandangular differencesbetakenintoaccount. If thecalibrationsourceisin
thefar eld, thenthephaseshiftersaresettosteer thebeaminthedirectionof thesource.
Ineither case, eachelementtogglesthroughall of itsphasesettingsuntil theoutputsignal
is maximized. Thedifferencebetween thesteering phaseand thephasethat yields the
maximumsignal isthecalibrationphase.
Element 1 Element 2 Element 3 Element 4 Element 5
Calibrated array output
Uncalibrated array output
FIGURE10-4 The uncalibrated array output is less than the calibrated array output, because
errors in the uncalibrated array do not allow the signal vectors from the elements to align.
Target
Calibration source FIGURE 10-5
Far-eld calibration.
FIGURE 10-6
Layout of the smart
antenna test bed.
Making power measurements for every phase setting at every element in an array
is extremely time-consuming. Calibration techniques that measureboth amplitudeand
phaseof thecalibrated signal tend to bemuch faster. Accurately measuring thesignal
phaseisreasonableinananechoic chamber but difcult intheoperational environment.
Measurements at four orthogonal phase settings yield sufcient information to obtain
amaximumlikelihoodestimateof thecalibrationphase[4]. Theelement phaseerror is
calculatedfrompowermeasurementsatthefourphasestates, andtheprocedureisrepeated
for eachelementinthearray. Additional measurementsimprovesignal-to-noiseratio, and
theprocedurecanberepeatedtoachievedesiredaccuracywithinresolutionof thephase
shifters, sincethealgorithmisintrinsicallyconvergent.
Another approachusesamplitude-onlymeasurementsfrommultipleelementstond
thecomplex eld at an element [5]. Therst step measures thepower output fromthe
array when the phases of multiple elements are successively shifted with the different
phaseintervals. Next, themeasuredpower variationis expandedintoaFourier series to
derivethecomplex electric eldof thecorrespondingelements. Themeasurement time
reductioncomesat theexpenseof increasedmeasurement error.
Transmit/receivemodulecalibrationisaniterativeprocessthat startswithadjusting
theattenuatorsforuniformgainattheelements[6]. Thephaseshiftersarethenadjustedto
compensatefor theinsertionphasedifferencesat eachelement. Ideally, whencalibrating
thearray, thephaseshiftersgainremainsconstantasthephasesettingsarevaried, butthe
attenuators insertionphasecanvary as afunctionof thephasesetting. This calibration
shouldbedoneacrossthebandwidth, rangeof operatingtemperatures, andphasesettings.
If thephaseshifters gainvaries as afunctionof setting, thentheattenuators needtobe
compensatedaswell. Afteriteratingoverthisprocess, all thecalibrationsettingsaresaved
andappliedat theappropriatetimes.
Figure10-6shows aneight-element uniformcircular array (UCA) inwhichacen-
ter element radiates acalibrationsignal to theother elements inthearray [7]. Sincethe
calibrationsourceisinthecenter of thearray, thesignal pathfromthecalibrationsource
to each element is identical. As previously noted, randomerrors arehighly dependent
on temperature[8]. An experimental model of theUCA in Figure10-6 was placed in-
sideatemperature-controlledroomandcalibratedat 20
C. Themeasuredamplitudeand
phaseerrorsatthreetemperaturesareshowninFigure10-7andFigure10-8, respectively.
Increasing thetemperatureof theroomto 25
C then to 30
C without recalibration in-

creases theerrors showninFigure10-7andFigure10-8. This experiment demonstrates
theneedof dynamiccalibrationinasmart antennaarray.
10.2.2 Signal Injection
Calibratingwitharadiatingsourceisdifcult, becausethecalibrationsignal transmission/
reception depends on the environment. One technique commonly used in digital
10.2 ArrayCalibration 379
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
40
20
0
Signal path
P
h
a
s
e

e
r
r
o
r

(
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
)
20 C
25 C
30 C
FIGURE 10-7
Amplitude error for
the UCA antenna
as the system
temperature
changes from 20
C
with calibration to
25
C without
recalibration and to
30
C without
recalibration.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.6
Signal path
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

e
r
r
o
r

(
V
r
m
s
) 20 C
25 C
30 C
0.8
1.0
FIGURE 10-8
Phase error for the
UCA antenna as the
system temperature
changes from 20
C
with calibration to
25
C without
recalibration and
to 30
C without
recalibration.
beamformingarraysisinjectingacalibrationsignal intothesignal pathof eachelement
inthearray behindeachelement as showninFigure10-9[9]. This techniqueprovides
a high-quality calibration signal for the circuitry behind the element. Unfortunately, it
doesnot calibratefor theelement patternsthat havesignicant variationsduetomutual
coupling, edgeeffects, andmultipath.
10.2.3 Near-Field Scan
A planar near-eldscanner positionedvery closeto thearray moves aprobedirectly in
front of eachelement to measuretheamplitudeandphaseof all theelements [10]. The
measuredeldis transformedback to theapertureto recreatetheeldradiatedat each
FIGURE 10-9
Inserting a
calibration signal
into the signal paths
in a digital
beamformer.
C
o
m
p
u
t
e
r
Calibration
signal
A
r
r
a
y

e
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
Receiver A/D
Receiver A/D
Receiver A/D
FIGURE 10-10 Alignment results (measured phase deviation from desired value).
a: Unaligned. b: After single alignment with uncorrected measurements. c: After alignment
with fully corrected measurements. From W. T. Patton and L. H. Yorinks, Near-eld alignment
of phased-array antennas, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, Vol. 47, No. 3,
March 1999, pp. 584591.
element. The calibration algorithmiterates between the measured phase and the array
weightsuntil thephaseatall theelementsisthesame. Figure10-10showstheprogression
of thephasecorrectionalgorithmfromlefttoright. Thepictureontheleftisuncalibrated,
thecenter pictureis after oneiteration, and thepictureon theright is after calibration
is completed. This techniques is exceptionally good at correcting static errors prior to
deployinganantennaisnot practical for dynamicerrors.
10.3 BROADBAND SIGNAL PROCESSING
CONSIDERATIONS
Broadbandarraysusetappeddelaylinesthathavefrequency-dependenttransferfunctions.
Arrayperformanceisafunctionof thenumberof taps,thetapspacing,andthetotal delayin
eachchannel. Theminimumnumber of tapsrequiredtoobtainsatisfactory performance
for a given bandwidth may bedetermined as discussed in Section 2.5. Thediscussion
of broadband signal processing considerations given herefollows thetreatment of this
subjectgivenbyRodgersandCompton[1113]. Theideal (distortionless)channel transfer
functionsarederived; adaptivearrayperformanceusingquadraturehybridprocessingand
two-, three-, andve-tapdelaylineprocessingareconsidered; andresultsandconclusions
for broadbandsignal processingarethendiscussed.
10.3 BroadbandSignal ProcessingConsiderations 381
10.3.1 Distortionless Channel Transfer Functions
Theelement channels of thetwo-element array in Figure10-11 arerepresented by the
transfer functions H
1
() andH
2
(). Let thedesiredsignal arriveat
s
, measuredrelative
tothearrayfacenormal. Thearraycarrier frequencyis
0
, andthepoint sourcesspacing
isd =
0
/2= b/
0
, where isthewavefront propagationvelocity.
Fromthepointof viewof thedesiredsignal, theoverall transfer functionencountered
inpassingthroughthearrayof Figure10-11is
H
d
() = H
1
() + H
2
() exp
_
j
d
sin
s
_
(10.7)
andtheoverall transfer functionseenbytheinterferencesignal is
H
I
() = H
1
() + H
2
() exp
_
j
d
sin
i
_
(10.8)
Nowrequirethat
H
d
() = exp(j T
1
) (10.9)
and
H
I
() = 0 (10.10)
By choosing H
d
() accordingto (10.9), thedesiredsignal is permittedto experiencea
timedelay T
1
inpassingthroughthearray but otherwiseremains undistorted. Choosing
H
I
() = 0resultsincompletesuppressionof theinterferencesignal fromthearrayoutput.
H
2
(w) H
1
(w)
Interference
Signal
q
i
q
s
d

s
i
n

q
s
d

s
i
n

qi
d
Array
output
FIGURE 10-11
Two-element array.
Todeterminewhetheritispossibletoselect H
1
() andH
2
() tosatisfy(10.9)and(10.10),
solve(10.9) and(10.10) for H
1
() andH
2
(). SettingH
1
() = |H
1
()| exp[j
1
()] and
H
2
() = |H
2
()| exp[j
2
()] resultsin
|H
1
()| exp[j
1
()] +|H
2
()| exp
_
j
_
2
()

0
sin
s
__
= exp(j T
1
) (10.11)
|H
1
()| exp[j
1
()] +|H
2
()| exp
_
j
_
2
()

0
sin
i
__
= 0 (10.12)
Tosatisfy(10.9) and(10.10), it followsfrom(10.11) and(10.12) (asshownbythedevel-
opment outlinedintheProblemssection) that
H
1
() = H
2
() =
1
_
2
_
1cos
_
0
(sin
i
sin
s
)
__
(10.13)
2
() =

2
_

0
_
[sin
s
+sin
i
] n
2
T
1
(10.14)
1
() =

2
_

0
_
[sin
s
sin
i
] n
2
T
1
(10.15)
where n is any odd integer. This result means that the amplitude of the ideal transfer
functionsareequal andfrequencydependent. Equations(10.14) and(10.15) furthermore
showthatthephaseof eachlterisalinearfunctionof frequencywiththeslopedependent
onthespatial arrival angles of thesignals as well as onthetimedelay T
1
of thedesired
signal.
Plotsof theamplitudefunctionin(10.13) areshowninFigure10-12for twochoices
of arrival angles (
s
= 0
and
s
= 80
), where it is seen that the amplitude of the

distortionlesstransferfunctionisnearlyatovera40%bandwidthwhenthedesiredsignal
is at broadside(
s
= 0
) andtheinterferencesignal is 90
frombroadside(
i
= 90
).
Examinationof (10.13) showsthatwhenever(sin
I
sin
s
) isintheneighborhoodof 1,
FIGURE 10-12
Distortionless
transfer function
amplitude versus
normalized
frequency for
d =
0
/2. From
Rodgers and
Compton, Technical
Report ESL 3832-3,
1975 [12].
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.5 1 1.5 2
Bandwidth
40%
|
H
(
w
)
|
w/w
0
s
= 80
i
= 90
s
= 0
i
= 90
thentheresultingamplitudefunctionwill benearly at over the40%bandwidthregion.
If, however, both thedesired and interferencesignals arefar frombroadside(as when
d
= 80
and
i
= 90
), thentheamplitudefunctionisnolonger at.
Thedegreeof atnessof thedistortionlesslteramplitudefunctionisinterpretedin
termsof thesignal geometrywithrespecttothearraysensitivitypattern. Ingeneral, when
thephasesof H
1
() andH
2
() areadjustedtoyieldthemaximumundistortedresponseto
thedesiredsignal, thecorrespondingarraysensitivitypatternwill havecertainnulls. The
distortionless lter amplitudefunctionis thenthemost at whentheinterferencesignal
fallsintooneof thesepatternnulls.
Equation(10.13) furthermoreshowsthatsingularitiesoccurinthedistortionlesschan-
nel transfer functionswhenever (/
0
)(sin
i
sin
s
) = n2 wheren = 0, 1, 2, . . ..
Thecasewhenn= 0occurswhenthedesiredandinterferencesignalsarrivefromexactly
thesamedirection, so it is hardly surprising that thearray would experiencedifculty
trying to receiveonesignal whilenulling theother in this case. Theother cases when
n= 1, 2, . . ., occur whenthesignalsarrivefromdifferent directions, but thephaseshifts
betweenelements differ by amultipleof 2 radians at somefrequency inthesignal
band.
Thephasefunctions
1
() and
2
() of (10.14) and(10.15) arelinear functions of
frequency. When T
1
= 0, the phase slope of H
1
() is proportional to sin
s
sin
i
,
whereasthat of H
2
() isproportional tosin
i
+ sin
s
. Consequently, whenthedesired
signal isbroadside,
1
() =
2
(). Furthermore, thephasedifferencebetween
1
()
and
2
() isalsoalinear functionof frequency, aresultthatwouldbeexpectedsincethis
allows theinterelement phaseshift (which is also alinear function of frequency) to be
canceled.
10.3.2 Quadrature Hybrid and Tapped Delay Line Processing
for a Least Mean Squares Array
Consider atwo-element adaptivearrayusingtheleast meansquares(LMS) algorithm. If
wisthecolumnvector of arrayweights, R
xx
isthecorrelationmatrixof input signalsto
eachadaptiveweight, andr
xd
isthecross-correlationvector betweenthereceivedsignal
vector x(t) andthereferencesignal d(t), thenas showninChapter 3theoptimumarray
weight vector that minimizes E{
2
(t)} (where(t) = d(t)arrayoutput) isgivenby
w
opt
= R
1
xx
r
xd
(10.16)
If thesignal appearingattheoutputof eachsensor elementconsistsof adesiredsignal, an
interferencesignal, andathermal noisecomponent(whereeachcomponentisstatistically
independent of theothers andhas zero mean), thentheelements of R
xx
canreadily be
evaluatedintermsof thesecomponent signals.
Consider thetappeddelay lineemployingreal (insteadof complex) weights shown
inFigure10-13. Sinceeachsignal x
i
(t) isjust atime-delayedversionof x
1
(t), it follows
that
x
2
(t) = x
1
(t )
x
2
(t) = x
1
(t 2)
.
.
.
x
L
(t) = x
1
[t (L 1)]
(10.17)
FIGURE 10-13
Tapped delay line
processor for a
single-element
channel having real
adaptive weights.
w
1
w
L
x
L
(t) x
4
(t) x
3
(t) x
2
(t) x
1
(t)
Channel
output
Sensor
element
w
2
w
4
w
3

Nowsincetheelementsof R
xx
aregivenby
r
x
i
x
j

= E{x
i
(t)x
j
(t)} (10.18)
it followsfrom(10.17) that
r
x
i
x
j
= r
x
1
x
1
(
ij
) (10.19)
wherer
x
1
x
1
(
ij
) istheautocorrelationfunctionof x
1
(t), and
ij
isthetimedelay between
x
i
(t) andx
j
(t). Furthermore, r
x
i
x
i
(
ij
) isthesumof threeautocorrelationfunctionsthose
of thedesiredsignal, theinterference, andthethermal noisesothat
r
x
1
x
1
(
ij
) = r
dd
(
ij
) +r
II
(
ij
) +r
nn
(
ij
) (10.20)
For theelementsof R
xx
correspondingtox
i
(t) andx
j
(t) fromdifferentelementchannels,
r
x
i
x
j
consistsonlyof thesumof theautocorrelationfunctionsof thedesiredsignal andthe
interferencesignal (withappropriatedelays) but not thethermal noisesincetheelement
noise fromchannel to channel is uncorrelated. Thus, for signals in different element
channels
r
x
i
x
j
(
ij
) = r
dd
(
d
ij
) +r
II
(
I
ij
) (10.21)
where
d
ij
denotes thetimedelay betweenx
i
(t) andx
j
(t) for thedesiredsignal, and
I
ij
denotesthetimedelaybetweenx
i
(t) andx
j
(t) for theinterferencesignal (thesetwotime
delayswill ingeneral bedifferentduetothedifferentanglesof arrival of thetwosignals).
Onlywhenx
i
(t) andx
j
(t) arefromthesamearrayelementchannel will
d
ij
=
I
ij
(which
maythenbedenotedby
i
j
).
Next, consider thequadraturehybridarray processor depictedinFigure10-14. Let
x
1
(t) and x
3
(t) denote the in-phase signal components and x
2
(t) and x
4
(t) denote the
quadrature-phase signal components of each of the elements output signals. Then the
in-phaseandquadraturecomponentsarerelatedby
x
2
(t) = x
1
(t)
x
4
(t) = x
3
(t)
_
(10.22)
w
1
x
3
(t) x
4
(t) x
1
(t) x
2
(t)
Array output
Quadrature
hybrid
w
2
w
4
w
3
Quadrature
hybrid
FIGURE 10-14
Quadrature hybrid
processing for a
two-element array.
Thesymbol denotestheHilbert transform
x(t)

=
1
x()
t
d (10.23)
wherethepreviousintegral isregardedasaCauchyprincipal valueintegral. Thevarious
elementsof thecorrelationmatrix
r
x
i
x
j
= E{x
i
(t)x
j
(t)} (10.24)
canthenbefoundbymakinguseof certainHilberttransformrelationsasfollows[14,15]:
E{ x(t) y(s)} = E{x(t)y(s)} (10.25)
E{ x(t)y(s)} = E{x(t) y(s)} (10.26)
sothat
E{ x(t)x(t)} = 0 (10.27)
E{x(t) y(s)} =

E{x(t)y(s)} (10.28)
where

E{x(t)y(s)} denotes theHilbert transformof r
xy
() where = s t. With the
previousrelationsandfrom(10.22) it thenfollowsthat
r
x
1
x
1
= E{x
1
(t)x
1
(t)} = r
x
1
x
1
(0) (10.29)
r
x
1
x
2
= E{x
1
(t)x
2
(t)} = E{x
1
(t) x
1
(t)} = 0 (10.30)
r
x
2
x
2
= E{x
2
(t)x
2
(t)} = E{ x
1
(t) x
1
(x)} (10.31)
= E{x
1
(t)x
1
(t)} = r
x
1
x
1
(0)
wherer
x
1
x
1
() istheautocorrelationfunctionof x
1
(t) givenby(10.20).
Whentwodifferentsensor elementchannelsareinvolved[aswithx
1
(t) andx
3
(t), for
example], then
E{x
1
(t) x
3
(t)} = r
dd
(
d
13
) +r
II
(
I
13
) (10.32)
where
d
13
and
I
13
represent thespatial timedelaysbetweenthesensor elementsof Fig-
ure10-14for thedesiredandinterferencesignals, respectively. Similarly
E{x
1
(t)x
4
(t)} = E{x
1
(t) x
3
(t)} =

E{x
1
(t)x
3
(t)}
= r
dd
(
d
13
) + r
II
(
I
13
) (10.33)
E{x
2
(t)x
3
(t)} = E{ x
1
(t)x
3
(t)} = E{ x
1
(t)x
3
(t)}
=
E{x
1
(t)x
3
(t)} = r
dd
(
d
13
) r
II
(
I
13
) (10.34)
E{x
2
(t)x
4
(t)} = E{ x
1
(t) x
3
(t)} = x{x
1
(t)x
3
(t)}
= r
dd
(
d
13
) +r
II
(
I
13
) (10.35)
Nowconsider thecross-correlationvector r
xd
denedby
r
xd

= E
x
1
(t)d(t)
x
2
(t)d(t)
.
.
.
x
2N
(t)d(t)
(10.36)
where N is the number of sensor elements. Each element of r
xd
, denoted by r
x
i
d
, is
just the cross-correlation between the reference signal d(t) and signal x
i
(t). Since the
reference signal is just a replica of the desired signal and is statistically independent
of the interference and thermal noise signals, the elements of r
xd
consist only of the
autocorrelationfunctionof thedesiredsignal sothat
r
x
i
d
= E{x
i
(t)d(t)} = r
dd
(
d
i
) (10.37)
where
d
i
represents thetimedelay betweenthereferencesignal andthedesiredsignal
component of x
i
(t). For anarray withtappeddelay lineprocessing, eachelement of r
xd
is theautocorrelationfunctionof thedesiredsignal evaluatedat atime-delay valuethat
reectsboththespatial delaybetweensensorelementsandthedelaylinedelaytothetapof
interest. Foranarraywithquadraturehybridprocessing, theelementsof r
xd
corresponding
toanin-phasechannel yieldtheautocorrelationfunctionof thedesiredsignal evaluated
at thespatial delayappropriatefor that element asfollows:
r
x
i
d
(in-phasechannel) = E{x
i
(t)d(t)} = r
dd
(
d
i
) (10.38)
Theelementsof r
xd
correspondingtoquadrature-phasechannelscanbeevaluatedusing
(10.27) and(10.28) asfollows:
r
x
i +1
d
(quadrature-phasechannel) = E{x
i +1
(t)d(t)}
= E{ x
i
(t)d(t)} = E{x
i
(t)
d(t)} (10.39)
=
E{x
i
(t)d(t)} = r
x
i
d
(
d
i
)
OnceR
xx
andr
xd
havebeenevaluatedfor agivensignal environment, theoptimal LMS
weightscanbecomputedfrom(10.16), andthesteady-stateresponseof theentirearray
canthenbeevaluated.
Thetappeddelay lineintheelement channel of Figure10-13hasachannel transfer
functiongivenby
H
1
() = w
1
+w
2
e
j
+w
3
e
j 2
+. . . +w
L
e
j (L1)
(10.40)
Likewise, thequadraturehybridprocessor of Figure10-14hasachannel transfer function
H
1
() = w
1
j w
2
(10.41)
Thearraytransfer functionfor thedesiredsignal andtheinterferenceaccountsfor the
effects of spatial delays betweenarray elements. A two-element array transfer function
for thedesiredsignal is
H
d
() = H
1
() + H
2
()e
j
d
(10.42)
whereasthetransfer functionfor theinterferenceis
H
I
() = H
1
() + H
2
() e
j
I
(10.43)
Thespatial timedelaysassociatedwiththedesiredandinterferencesignalsarerepresented
by
d
and
I
, respectively, betweenelement 1[withchannel transfer functionH
1
()] and
element2[withchannel transfer functionH
2
()]. Withtwosensor elementsspacedapart
byadistancedasinFigure10-11, thetwospatial timedelaysaregivenby
d
=
d
sin
s
(10.44)
I
=
d
sin
I
(10.45)
Theoutput signal-to-total-noiseratioisdenedas
SNR

=
P
d
P
I
+ P
n
(10.46)
whereP
d
, P
I
, andP
n
representtheoutputdesiredsignal power, interferencesignal power,
andthermal noisepower, respectively. Thearray output power for eachof theforegoing
threesignalsmay nowbeevaluated. Let
dd
() and
II
() represent thepower spectral
densities of thedesiredsignal andtheinterferencesignal, respectively; thenthedesired
signal output power isgivenby
P
d
=
_

dd
()|H
d
()|
2
d (10.47)
whereH
d
() istheoverall transferfunctionseenbythedesiredsignal, andtheinterference
signal output power is
P
I
=
_

II
()|H
1
()|
2
d (10.48)
whereH
I
() istheoverall transfer functionseenbytheinterferencesignal. Thethermal
noisepresent ineachelement output isstatisticallyindependent fromoneelement tothe
next. Let
nn
() denotethethermal noisepower spectral density; thenthenoisepower
contributedtothearrayoutput byelement 1is
P
n
1
=
_

nn
()|H
1
()|
2
d (10.49)
whereasthat contributedbyelement 2is
P
n
2
=
_

nn
()|H
2
()|
2
d (10.50)
Consequently, thetotal thermal noiseoutput power fromatwo-element arrayis
P
n
=
_

nn
()[|H
1
()|
2
+|H
2
()|
2
]d (10.51)
Theforegoingexpressionsmaynowbeusedin(10.46) toobtaintheoutputsignal-to-total-
noiseratio.
10.3.3 Performance Comparison of Four Array Processors
Inthissubsection, four adaptivearraysonewithquadraturehybridprocessingandthree
with tapped delay lineprocessing (using real weights)arecompared for signal band-
widths of 4, 10, 20, and40%. Tappeddelay lines usereal weights to preserveas much
simplicityaspossibleinthehardwareimplementation, althoughthissacricestheavail-
abledegreesof freedomwithaconsequent degradationintappeddelaylineperformance
relativetocombinedamplitudeandphaseweighting. Theresultsobtainedwill neverthe-
less serveas an indication of therelativeeffectiveness of tapped delay lineprocessing
comparedwithquadraturehybridprocessingfor broadbandsignals.
Thefour array processors to becompared areshown in Figure10-15, whereeach
array hastwosensor elementsandtheelementsarespacedone-half wavelengthapart at
thecenterfrequencyof thedesiredsignal bandwidth. Figure10-15ashowsanarrayhaving
quadraturehybridprocessing, whereas Figure10-15b10-15dexhibit tappeddelay line
processing. Theprocessor of Figure10-15bhasonedelayelement correspondingtoone-
quarter wavelength at the center frequency and two associated taps. The processor of
Figure10-15c hastwodelay elements, eachcorrespondingtoone-quarter wavelengthat
thecenter frequency, andthreeassociatedtaps. Theprocessor of Figure10-15dhasfour
delay elements, each corresponding to one-eighth wavelength at the center frequency,
and ve associated taps. Note that the total delay present in the tapped delay line of
Figure10-15disthesameasthatof Figure10-15c, sotheprocessor inFigure10-15dmay
beregardedasamorenelysubdividedversionof theprocessor inFigure10-15c.
Assumethat thedesiredsignal isbiphasemodulatedof theform
s
d
(t) = Acos[
0
t +(t) +] (10.52)
where(t) denotesaphaseanglethat iseither zeroor over eachbit interval, and is
anarbitraryconstant phaseangle(withintherange[0, 2]) for thedurationof anysignal
pulse. Thenthbit interval isdenedover T
0
+(n1)T t T
0
+nT, wherenisany
integer, T isthebitduration, andT
0
isaconstantthatdetermineswherethebittransitions
occur, asshowninFigure10-16.
Assumethat (t) is statistically independent over different bit intervals andis zero
or with equal probability and that T
0
is uniformly distributed over one bit interval;
w
1
x
4
x
3
(a)
QH
90 0 90 0
w
2
w
4
x
1
x
2
QH
w
3
(b)
x
5
w
3
x
4
w
4
x
1
w
1
x
2
w
2
0
4
x
4
(c)
w
4
x
5
w
5
x
6
w
6
x
1
w
1
x
2
w
2
x
3
w
3
0
4
0
4
(d)
x
9
x
10
w
9
w
10
0
8
0
8
0
8
0
8
x
8
w
8
x
7
w
7
x
6
w
6
x
4
x
5
w
4
w
5
x
3
w
3
x
2
w
2
x
1
w
1
FIGURE 10-15 Four adaptive array processors for broadband signal processing
comparison. a: Quadrature hybrid. b: Two-tap delay line. c: Three-tap delay line. d: Five-tap
delay line. From Rodgers and Compton, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., January 1979 [13].
then, s
d
(t) isastationaryrandomprocesswithpower spectral densitygivenby
dd
() =
A
2
T
2
_
sin(T/2)(
0
)
(T/2) (
0
)
_
2
(10.53)
Thispower spectral densityisshowninFigure10-17.
FIGURE 10-16
Bit transitions for
biphase modulated
signal.
f(t)
p
T T
T
0
T T T
t
FIGURE 10-17
Desired signal power
spectral density.
S
d
(w)
w
0
w
1
w
0
+ w
1
w
0
Thereferencesignal equalsthedesiredsignal componentof x

1
(t) andistimealigned
withthedesiredcomponent of x
2
(t). Thedesiredsignal bandwidth will betakentobe
thefrequencyrangedenedbytherst nullsof thespectrumgivenby(10.53). Withthis
denition, thefractional bandwidththenbecomes
desiredsignal bandwidth =
2
1
0
(10.54)
where
1
isthefrequencyseparationbetweenthecenter frequency
0
andtherst null
1
=
2
T
(10.55)
Assumethattheinterferencesignal isaGaussianrandomprocesswithaat, bandlim-
itedpower spectral densityover therange
0
1
< <
0
+
1
; thentheinterference
signal spectrumappears in Figure 10-18. Finally, the thermal noise signals present at
eachelement arestatistically independent betweenelements, havingaat, bandlimited,
Gaussian spectral density over therange
0

1
< <
0
+
1
(identical with the
interferencespectrumof Figure10-18).
Withtheforegoingdenitionsof signal spectra, theintegralsof (10.48) and(10.51)
yieldinginterferenceandthermal noisepoweraretakenonlyoverthefrequencyrange
0
1
< <
0
+
1
. Thedesiredsignal power alsoisconsideredonlyover thefrequency
range
0

1
< <
0
+
1
toobtainaconsistent denitionof signal-to-noiseratio
(SNR). Therefore, theintegral of (10.47) iscarriedoutonlyover
0
1
< <
0
+
1
.
FIGURE 10-18
Interference signal
power spectral
density.
S
I
(w)
w
0
w
1
w
0
+ w
1
w
0

To compare the four adaptive array processors of Figure 10-15, the output SNR
performanceisevaluatedfor theaforementionedsignal conditions. Assumetheelement
thermal noisepower p
n
is10dBbelowtheelementdesiredsignal power p
s
sothat p
s
/p
n
=
10dB.Furthermore,supposethattheelementinterferencesignal power p
i
is20dBstronger
than theelement desired signal power so that p
s
/p
i
= 20 dB. Nowassumethat the
desiredsignal isincidentonthearrayfrombroadside.TheoutputSNRgivenby(10.46)can
beevaluatedfrom(10.47), (10.48), and(10.49) byassumingtheprocessor weightssatisfy
(10.16) for eachof thefour processor congurations. Theresultingoutput signal-to-total
noiseratiothatresultsusingeachprocessorisplottedinFigures10-1910-22asafunction
of theinterferenceangleof arrival for 4, 10, 20, and40%bandwidthsignals, respectively.
In all cases, regardless of thesignal bandwidth, when the interference approaches
broadside (near the desired signal) the SNR degrades rapidly, and the performance of
3 Taps
20
10
5
0
5
10
15
3 & 5 Taps
5 Taps
2 Taps
Quadrature hybrid
40
Interference angle
60 80
P
i
P
s
= 20 dB
P
n
P
s
= 10 dB
P
d
P
I

+

P
N
(
d
B
)
O
u
t
p
u
t
FIGURE 10-19
Output signal-to-
interference plus
noise ratio
interference angle
for four adaptive
processors with 4%
bandwidth signal.
From Rodgers and
Compton, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst.,
January 1979 [13].
3 Taps
20
5
0
5
10
15
3 & 5 Taps
5 Taps
2 Taps
Quadrature hybrid
40
Interference angle
60 80
P
i
P
s
= 20 dB
P
n
P
s
= 10 dB
P
d
P
I

+

P
N
(
d
B
)
O
u
t
p
u
t
FIGURE 10-20
Output signal-to-
interference plus
noise ratio versus
interference angle
for four adaptive
processors with
10% bandwidth
signal. From
Rodgers and
Compton, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst.,
January 1979 [13].
FIGURE 10-21
Output signal-to-
interference plus
noise ratio versus
interference angle
for four adaptive
processors with
20% bandwidth
signal. From
Rodgers and
Compton, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst.,
January 1979 [13].
3 Taps
20
10
5
0
5
10
15
3 & 5 Taps
5 Taps
2 Taps
Quadrature hybrid
40
Interference angle
60 80
P
i
P
s
= 20 dB
P
n
P
s
= 10 dB
P
d
P
I

+

P
N
(
d
B
)
O
u
t
p
u
t
FIGURE 10-22
Output signal-to-
interference plus
noise ratio versus
interference angle
for four adaptive
processors with
40% bandwidth
signal. From
Rodgers and
Compton, IEEE
Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst.,
January 1979 [13].
3 Taps
20
10
5
0
5
10
15
5 Taps
2 Taps
Quadrature hybrid
40
Interference angle
60 80
P
i
P
s
= 20 dB
P
n
P
s
= 10 dB
P
d
P
I

+

P
N
(
d
B
)
O
u
t
p
u
t
all four processorsbecomesidentical. ThisSNR degradationisexpectedsince, whenthe
interferenceapproachesthedesiredsignal, thedesiredsignal fallsintothenull provided
to cancel theinterference, and theoutput SNR consequently falls. Furthermore, as the
interferenceapproachesbroadside, theinterelementphaseshiftfor thissignal approaches
zero. Consequently, theneedto provideafrequency-dependent phaseshift behindeach
arrayelement todeal withtheinterferencesignal isless, andtheperformanceof all four
processorsbecomesidentical.
When theinterferencesignal is widely separated fromthedesired signal, then the
output SNR is different for the four processors being considered, and this difference
becomesmorepronouncedasthebandwidthincreases. For20and40%bandwidthsignals,
for example, neither thequadraturehybridprocessor nor thetwo-tapdelay lineproces-
sor provides good performanceas theinterferencesignal approaches endre. Theper-
formanceof boththethree- andve-tapdelay lineprocessorsremainsquitegoodinthe
endreregion, however. If 20%ormorebandwidthsignalsareaccommodated, thentapped
delaylineprocessingbecomesanecessity. Figure10-22showsthatthereisnosignicant
performanceadvantageprovidedby theve-tapprocessor comparedwiththethree-tap
processor, soathree-tapprocessorisadequateforupto40%bandwidthsignalsinthecase
of atwo-element array.
Figures 10-21 and 10-22 show that the output SNR performance of the two-tap
delay line processor peaks when the interference signal is 30
off broadside, because

theinterelement delay timeis/4(sincetheelementsarespacedapart by /2). Conse-
quently, thesingle-delayelementvalueof /4providesjusttherightamountof timedelay
tocompensateexactlyfor theinterelement timedelayandtoproduceanimprovement in
theoutput SNR.
Thethree-tap and ve-tap delay lineprocessors both produceamaximumSNR of
about 12.5dB at wideinterferenceanglesof 70
or greater. For ideal channel processing,

theinterferencesignal iseliminated, thedesiredsignal ineachchannel isaddedcoherently
toproduce P
d
= 4p
s
, andthethermal noiseisaddednoncoherently toyield P
N
= 2p
n
.
Thus, thebestpossibletheoretical outputSNRfor atwo-elementarraywiththermal noise
10dB belowthedesiredsignal andnointerferenceis13dB. Therefore, thethree-tapand
ve-tapdelay lineprocessorsaresuccessfully rejectingnearly all theinterferencesignal
power at wideoff-boresight angles.
10.3.4 Processor Transfer Functions
Ideally, thearray transfer function for thedesired signal should beconstant across the
desiredsignal bandwidth, thereby preventingdesiredsignal distortion. Theinterference
transfer functionshouldbealowarrayresponseover theinterferencebandwidth.
Thetransfer functions for thefour processors andthetwo-element array areevalu-
ated using (10.40)(10.45). Using thesameconditions adopted in computing theSNR
performance, Figures10-2310-26show|H
d
()| and|H
I
()| for thefour processorsof
20
90
90
10
Interference angle
Interference signal
10
135
0.98 0.984 0.988 0.992 0.996 1.001 1.004 1.008 1.012 1.016 1.02
120
105
90
75
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

(
d
B
)
60
45
30
15
0
Desired signal
Frequency (w/w
0
)
FIGURE 10-23
Quadrature hybrid
transfer functions at
4% bandwidth.
From Rodgers and
Compton, Technical
Report ESL 3832-3,
1975 [12].
FIGURE 10-24
Two-tap delay line
transfer functions
at 4% bandwidth.
From Rodgers and
Compton, Technical
Report ESL 3832-3,
1975 [12].
20
90
90
10
Interference angle
Interference signal
10
135
120
105
90
75
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

(
d
B
)
60
45
30
15
0
Desired signal
0.98 0.984 0.988 0.992 0.996 1.001 1.004 1.008 1.012 1.016 1.02
Frequency (w/w
0
)
Figure 10-15 with a 4%signal bandwidth and various interference signal angles. The
resultsshownintheseguresindicatethat for all four processorsandfor all interference
anglesthedesiredsignal responseisquiteat over thesignal bandwidth. Astheinterfer-
enceapproaches thedesiredsignal angleat broadside, however, the(constant) response
level of thearraytothedesiredsignal dropsbecauseof thedesiredsignal partiallyfalling
withinthearraypatterninterferencenull.
The results in Figure 10-23 for quadrature hybrid processing show that the array
response to the interference signal has a deep notch at the center frequency when the
interferencesignal iswell separated(
i
> 20
) fromthedesiredsignal. Astheinterference
signal approachesthedesiredsignal (
i
< 20
), thenotchmigratesawayfromthecenter
frequency, because the processor weights must compromise between rejection of the
interferencesignal andenhancement of thedesiredsignal whenthetwosignalsareclose.
Migrationof thenotchimprovesthedesiredsignal response(sincethedesiredsignal power
spectral densitypeaksat thecenter frequency) whileaffectinginterferencerejectiononly
slightly (sincetheinterferencesignal power spectral density is constant over thesignal
band).
Thearrayresponsefor thetwo-tapprocessor isshowninFigure10-24. Theresponse
toboththedesiredandinterferencesignalsisverysimilar tothat obtainedfor quadrature
hybridprocessing. Themost notablechangeistheslightlydifferent shapeof thetransfer
function notch presented to theinterferencesignal by thetwo-tap delay lineprocessor
comparedwiththequadraturehybridprocessor.
Figure10-25shows thethree-tapprocessor array response. Theinterferencesignal
responseis considerably reduced, with a minimumrejection of theinterferencesignal
of about 45 dB. When the interference signal is close to the desired signal, the array
responsehas asinglemilddip. As theseparationanglebetweentheinterferencesignal
and the desired signal increases, the single dip becomes more pronounced and nally
developsintoadoubledipatverywideangles. Itisdifculttoattributemuchsignicance
to the double-dip behavior since it occurs at such a low response level (of more than
75dB attenuation). Theve-tapprocessor responseof Figure10-26isverysimilar tothe
three-tapprocessorresponseexceptslightlymoreinterferencesignal rejectionisachieved.
20
70
10
90
10
Interference angle
Interference signal
90
135
120
105
90
75
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

(
d
B
)
60
45
30
15
0
Desired signal
0.98 0.984 0.988 0.992 0.996 1.001 1.004 1.008 1.012 1.016 1.02
Frequency (w/w
0
)
FIGURE 10-25
Three-tap delay line
transfer functions
at 4% bandwidth.
From Rodgers and
Compton, Technical
Report ESL 3832-3,
1975 [12].
20
50
10
90
10
Interference angle
Interference signal
90
135
120
105
90
75
A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

(
d
B
)
60
40
30
15
0
Desired signal
0.98 0.984 0.988 0.992 0.996 1.001 1.004 1.008 1.012 1.016 1.02
Frequency (w/w
0
)
FIGURE 10-26
Five-tap delay line
transfer functions
at 4% bandwidth.
From Rodgers and
Compton, Technical
Report ESL 3832-3,
1975 [12].
Asthesignal bandwidthincreases, theprocessor responsecurvesremainessentially
thesameasinFigures10-2310-26except thefollowing:
1. Astheinterferencesignal bandwidthincreases, it becomesmoredifcult toreject the
interferencesignal overtheentirebandwidth, sotheminimumrejectionlevel increases.
2. Thedesiredsignal responsedecreasesbecausethearrayfeedbackreducesall weights
tocompensatefor thepresenceof agreater interferencesignal component at thearray
output, therebyresultingingreater desiredsignal attenuation.
The net result is that as the signal bandwidth increases, the output SNR performance
degrades, asconrmedbytheresultsof Figures10-1910-22.
10.4 COMPENSATION FOR MUTUAL COUPLING
Inmany applications, thelimitedspaceavailablefor mountinganantennamotivatesthe
useof asmall array. Asthearraysizedecreases, thearrayelement spacingbecomesless
thanahalf-wavelength, andmutual couplingeffectsbecomemoreof afactor indegrad-
ingthearrayperformance. Whenanarrayconsistsof single-modeelements(meaningthat
theelement aperturecurrentsmay changeinamplitudebut not inshapeasafunctionof
thesignal angleof arrival), thenitispossibletomodifytheelementweightstocompensate
for thepatterndistortioncausedbythemutual couplingat aparticular angle[16]. These
weight adjustmentsmayworkfor morethanoneangle.
Let thevector v denotethecoupling perturbed measured voltages appearing at the
output of thearray elements, andlet v
d
represent thecouplingunperturbedvoltagesthat
wouldappear at thearrayelement outputsif nomutual couplingwerepresent. Theeffect
of mutual couplingonsingle-modeelementsiswrittenas
v(u) = C v
d
(u) (10.56)
whereu = sin, istheangleof arrival, andthematrixCdescribestheeffectsof mutual
couplingandisindependentof thesignal scanangle. If thearrayiscomposedof multimode
elements, thenthematrixC wouldbescanangledependent.
It followsthat theunperturbedsignal vector, v
d
canberecoveredfromtheperturbed
signal vector byintroducingcompensationfor themutual coupling
v
d
= C
1
v (10.57)
Introducing the compensation network C
1
as shown in Figure 10-27 then allows all
subsequent beamforming operations to beperformed with ideal (unperturbed) element
signals, asarecustomarilyassumedinpatternsynthesis.
Thismutual couplingcompensationisappliedtoaneight-elementlinear arrayhaving
element spacingd = 0.517 consistingof identical elements. Figure10-28(a) showsthe
effectsof mutual couplingbydisplayingthedifferenceinelement patternshapebetween
acentral andanedgeelement inthearray.
Figure10-28displaysasynthesized30dBChebyshevpatternbothwithout(a)andwith
(b) mutual couplingcompensation. It is apparent fromthis result that thecompensation
networkgivesabout a10dB improvement inthesidelobelevel.
FIGURE 10-27
Coupling
Compensation and
Beamforming in an
Array Antenna. From
Steyskal & Herd,
IEEE Trans. Ant &
Prop., Dec. 1995.
1
d
2
d
N
d
Array
elements
1
2
N
Coupling
perturbed
measured
voltages
Coupling
compensation
Unperturbed
voltages
Complex
weights
Output
beam
C
C
1
W
1
W
2
W
N
10.4 Compensationfor Mutual Coupling 397
Angle, deg
(a)
(b)
80 60 30 0 30 60 80
80 60 30 0 30 60 80
40
30
20
10
0
P
o
w
e
r
,

d
B
Measured
Theory
Angle, deg
40
30
20
10
0
P
o
w
e
r
,

d
B
Measured
Theory
FIGURE 10-28 30 dB Chebyshev pattern (a) without and (b) with Coupling Compensation
with a Scan Angle of 0
. From Steyskal & Herd, IEEE Trans. Ant. & Prop. Dec. 1995.
10.5 MULTIPATH COMPENSATION
In many operating environments, multipath rays impingeon thearray shortly after the
direct path signal arrives at thesensors. Multipath distorts any interferencesignal that
may appear in thevarious element channels, thereby severely limiting theinterference
cancellation. A tappeddelaylineprocessorcombinesdelayedandweightedreplicasof the
input signal toformthelteredoutput signal andtherebyhasthepotential tocompensate
for multipatheffects, sincemultipathraysalsoconsist of delayedandweightedreplicas
of thedirect pathray.
10.5.1 Two-Channel Interference Cancellation Model
Consider anideal two-element adaptivearray withonechannels(calledtheauxiliary
channel) responseadjustedsothatanyjammingsignal enteringtheother channel through
thesidelobes (termedthemain channel) is canceledat thearray output. A systemde-
signedtosuppresssidelobejamminginthismanneriscalledacoherentsidelobecanceller
(CSLC), and Figure10-29 depicts atwo-channel CSLC systemin which theauxiliary
channel employs tappeddelay linecompensationinvolvingL weights and L 1delay
elementsof valuesecondseach. A delayelementof valueD = (L 1)/2isincluded
inthemainchannel so thecenter tapof theauxiliary channel corresponds to theoutput
of thedelay D in themain channel, thereby permitting compensation for both positive
andnegativevalues of theoff-broadsideangle. This ideal two-element CSLC system
model exhibitsall thesalientcharacteristicsthatamorecomplexsysteminvolvingseveral
auxiliary channelswouldhave, sothetwo-element systemservesasaconvenient model
for performanceevaluationof multipathcancellation[17].
Thesystemperformancemeasureis theability of theCSLC tocancel anundesired
interferencesignal throughproper designof thetappeddelay line. Inactual practice, an
adaptivealgorithmadjuststheweight settings. Toeliminatetheeffect of algorithmselec-
tionfromconsideration, onlythesteady-stateperformanceisevaluated. Sincethesteady-
statesolution can befound analytically, it is necessary to determineonly theresulting
solutionfor theoutput residuepower. Thisresiduepower isthenadirect measureof the
interferencecancellationabilityof thetwo-element CSLC model.
FIGURE 10-29
Ideal two-element
CSLC model with
auxiliary channel
compensation
involving L weights
and L 1 delay
elements.
w
1
w
L
x
L
(t)
Residue
x
2
(t)
x
1
(t)
Main channel
Auxiliary channel
w
2
x
0
(t)

D
L 1
2
=
+
q
10.5 MultipathCompensation 399
Let x
0
(t), x
1
(t), ande(t) represent thecomplexenvelopesignalsof themainchannel
inputsignal, theauxiliarychannel inputsignal, andtheoutputresiduesignal, respectively.
Denethecomplexsignal vector
x
T

= [x
1
(t), x
2
(t), . . . , x
L
(t)] (10.58)
where
x
2
(t)

= x
1
(t )
.
.
.
x
L
(t)

= x
1
[t (L 1)]
Also, denethecomplexweight vector
w
T

= [w
1
, w
2
, . . . , w
L
] (10.59)
Theoutput of thetappeddelaylinemaythenbeexpressedas
lter output =
L
i =1
x
1
[t (i 1)]w
i
= w
x(t) (10.60)
Theresidue(complexenvelope) signal isgivenby
e(t) = x
0
(t D) +w
x(t) (10.61)
Theweightvectorwminimizestheresiduesignal inameansquareerror(MSE) sense.
For stationaryrandomprocesses, thisisequivalent tominimizingtheexpression
R
ee
(0) = E {e(t)e
(t)} (10.62)
From(10.61) andthefact that
E{x
0
(t D)x
0
(t D)} = r
x
0
x
0
(0) (10.63)
E{x(t)x
0
(t D)} = r
xx
0
(D) (10.64)
E{x(t)x
(t)} = R
xx
(0) (10.65)
it followsthat
R
ee
(0) = r
x
0
x
0
(0) r
xx
0
(D)R
1
xx
(0)r
xx
0
(D)
+[r
xx
0
(D) +w
R
xx
(0)] R
1
xx
(0) [r
xx
0
(D) +R
xx
(0)w] (10.66)
Minimize(10.66) by appropriately selectingthecomplex weight vector w. Assumethe
matrixR
xx
(0) isnonsingular: thevalueof wfor whichthisminimumoccursisgivenby
w
opt
= R
1
xx
(0)r
xx
0
(D) (10.67)
Thecorrespondingminimumresiduesignal power thenbecomes
R
ee
(0)
min
= r
x
0
x
0
(0) r
xx
0
(D)R
1
xx
(0)r
xx
0
(D) (10.68)
Interferencecancellationperformanceof theCSLC model of Figure10-27isdetermined
byevaluating(10.66) usingselectedsignal environment assumptions.
10.5.2 Signal Environment Assumptions
Let s
1
(t,
1
) represent the interference signal arriving from direction
1
, and let
s
m
(t,
m
, D
m
,
m+1
) form= 2, . . . , Mrepresentthemultipathstructureassociatedwiththe
interferencesignal that consistsof acollectionof M 1correlatedplanewavesignalsof
thesamefrequencyarrivingfromdifferent directionssothat
m+k
=
1
and
m+k
=
m+l
for k = l. Themultipathrayseachhaveanassociatedreectioncoefcient
m
andatime
delay withrespect to thedirect ray D
m
. Thestructureof thecovariancematrix for this
multipathmodel canthenbeexpressedas[18]
R
ss
= V
s
AV
s
(10.69)
whereV
s
istheN M signal matrixgivenby
V
s
=
_
| | |
v
s
1
v
s
2
v
s
M
| | |
_
(10.70)
whosecomponentsaregivenbytheN 1vectors
v
s
m
=
_
P
s
m
1
exp[j 2(d/
0
) sin
m
]
exp[j 2(d/
0
)2sin
m
]
.
.
.
exp[j 2(d/
0
) (N 1) sin
m
]
(10.71)
whereP
s
m
=
2
m
denotesthepower associatedwiththesignal s
m
, andAisthemultipath
correlationmatrix. WhenA= I, thevarioussignal componentsareuncorrelatedwhereas
for A = U(theM M matrix of unity elements) thevariouscomponentsareperfectly
correlated. For purposes of numerical evaluation the correlation matrix model may be
selectedas[18]
A=
1
2

M1
1
M1
.
.
.
M1
1
0 1 (10.72)
Notethat channel-to-channel variationsin
m
, D
m
, and
m
cannot beaccommodatedby
thissimpliedmodel. Consequently, amoregeneral model must bedevelopedtohandle
suchvariations, whichtendtooccurwherenear-eldscatteringeffectsaresignicant. The
input signal covariancematrixmaybewrittenas
R
xx
= R
nn
+V
s
AV
s
(10.73)
whereR
nn
denotesthenoisecovariancematrix.
If only asinglemultipathray ispresent, thens(t,
1
) denotesthedirect interference
signal, and s
m
(t,
m
, D
m
,
2
) represents the multipath ray associated with the direct
interferencesignal. Thereceivedsignal at themainchannel element isthengivenby
x
0
(t) = s(t,
1
) +s
m
(t,
m
, D
m
,
2
) (10.74)
Denote s(t,
1
) by s(t); then s
m
(t,
m
, D
m
,
2
) can be written as
m
s(t D
m
)
exp(j
0
D
m
) sothat
x
0
(t) = s(t) +
m
s(t D
m
) exp(j
0
D
m
) (10.75)
where
0
isthecenter frequencyof theinterferencesignal. It thenfollowsthat
x
1
(t) = s(t
12
) exp(j
0
12
)
+
m
s(t D
m
22
) exp[j
0
(D
m
+
22
)] (10.76)
where
12
and
22
represent the propagation delay between the main channel element
and theauxiliary channel element for thewavefronts of s(t,
1
) and s
m
(t,
m
, d
m
,
2
),
respectively.
Assuming the signals s(t,
1
) and s
m
(t,
m
, D
m
,
2
) possess at spectral density
functions over the bandwidth B, as shown in Figure 10-30a, then the corresponding
auto- andcross-correlationfunctionsof x
0
(t) andx
1
(t) canbeevaluatedby recognizing
that
R
xx
() =
1
{
xx
()} (10.77)
where
1
{} is theinverseFourier transform, and
xx
() denotes thecross-spectral
densitymatrixof x(t).
From(10.74), (10.76), and(10.77) it immediatelyfollowsthat
r
x
0
x
0
(0) = 1+|
m
|
2
+
sinBD
m
BD
m
_
m
e
j
0
D
m
+
m
e
j
0
D
m
_
(10.78)
Likewise, dening f [, sgn1, sgn2]

=
sinB[ +sgn1 (i 1)+sgn2 D]
B[ +sgn1 (i 1)+sgn2 D]
and g[, sgn]

=
sinB[ +sgn (i k)]
B[ +sgn (i k)]
, then
r
x
i
x
0
(D) = f [
12
, +, ]exp{j
0
[
12
+(i 1)]}
+ f [D
m
+
22
, +, ]
m
exp{j
0
[
22
+(i 1)+ D
m
]} (10.79)
+ f [D
m
12
, , +]
m
exp{j
0
[
12
+(i 1) D
m
]}
+ f [
22
, +, ]|
m
|
2
exp{j
0
[
22
+(i 1)]}
xx
(w)
w

= 2f
B 0
(a)
B
R
xx
()
t
0
1
B
(b)
2
B
FIGURE 10-30
Flat spectral density
function and
corresponding
autocorrelation
function for
interference signal.
a: Spectral density
function.
b: Autocorrelation
function.
r
x
i
x
k
(0) = g[0, +][1+|
m
|
2
]exp[j
0
(i k)]
+g[
12
22
D
m
, ]
m
exp{ j
0
[
12
22
D
m
(i k)]} (10.80)
+g[
12
22
D
m
, +]
m
exp{j
0
[
12
22
D
m
+(i k)]}
Thevector r
xx
0
(D) isthengivenby
r
xx
0
(D) =
r
x
1
x
0
(D)
r
x
2
x
0
(D)
.
.
.
r
x
N
x
0
(D)
(10.81)
andthematrixR
xx
(0) isgivenby
R
xx
(0) =
r
x
1
x
1
(0) r
x
1
x
2
(0) r
x
1
x
N
(0)
.
.
. r
x
2
x
2
(0)
.
.
.
r
x
1
x
N
(0) r
x
N
x
N
(0)
(10.82)
To evaluate (10.68) for the minimumpossible value of output residue power (10.78),
(10.79), and(10.80), showthat it isnecessarytospecifythefollowingparameters:
N= number of tapsinthetransversal lter
m
= multipathreectioncoefcient
0
= (radian) center frequencyof interferencesignal
D
m
= multipathdelaytimewithrespect todirect ray
12
= propagationdelaybetweenthemainantennaelement andtheauxiliaryantenna
element for thedirect ray
22
= propagationdelaybetweenthemainantennaelement andtheauxiliaryantenna
element for themultipathray
= transversal lter intertapdelay
B = interferencesignal bandwidth
D = mainchannel receiver timedelay
Thequantities
12
and
22
arerelatedtotheCSLC arraygeometryby
12
=
d
sin
1
22
=
d
sin
2
(10.83)
where
d= interelement arrayspacing
= wavefront propagationspeed
1
= angleof incidenceof direct ray
2
= angleof incidenceof multipathray
10.5.3 Example: Results for Compensation of Multipath Effects
Aninterferencesignal hasadirectrayangleof arrival is
1
= 30
, themultipathrayangle
of arrival is
2
= 30
, and theinterelement spacing is d = 2.25

0
. Someadditional
signal andmultipathcharacteristicsare
center frequency f
0
= 237MHz
signal bandwidth B = 3MHz (10.84)
multipathreectioncoefcient
m
= 0.5
Referring to (10.76), (10.79), and (10.80), weseethat theparameters
0
,
12
,
22
,
D
m
, and enter theevaluationof theoutput residuepower intheformof theproducts
12
,
0
22
,
0
D
m
, and
0
. Theseproductsrepresentthephaseshiftexperiencedatthe
centerfrequency
0
asaconsequenceof thefourcorrespondingtimedelays. Likewise, the
parametersB, D, D
m
,
12
,
22
, and enter theevaluationof theoutput residuepower in
theformof theproductsBD, BD
m
, B
12
, B
22
, and B; thesetimebandwidthproducts
arephaseshiftsexperiencedbythehighestfrequencycomponentof thecomplexenvelope
interferencesignal asaconsequenceof thevecorrespondingtimedelays.Boththeintertap
delayandthemultipathdelayD
m
areimportantparametersthataffecttheCSLCsystem
performancethroughtheir correspondingtimebandwidthproducts; thus, theresultsare
givenherewiththetimebandwidthproductstakenasthefundamental quantityof interest.
Sincefor thisexample
1
=
2
, theproduct
0
12
isspeciedas
thentheproduct

0
12
=

4
22
=
(10.85)
Furthermore, let theproducts
0
D
m
and
0
begivenby
0
D
m
= 02k, k any integer
0
= 02l, l any integer
_
(10.86)
For theelement spacingd = 2.25
0
and
1
= 30
, thenspecify
B
12
= B
22
=
1
P
, P = 72 (10.87)
Finally, specifyingthemultipathdelaytimetocorrespondto46metersyields
BD
m
= 0.45 (10.88)
Since
D =
N 1
2
(10.89)
Only N and B need to be specied to evaluate the output residue power by way of
(10.68).
To evaluate the output residue power by way of (10.68) resulting fromthe array
geometry andmultipathconditions speciedby (10.84)(10.89) requires that thecross-
correlationvector r
xx
0
(D), theNN autocorrelationmatrixR
xx
(0), andtheautocorre-
lationfunctionr
x
0
x
0
(0) beevaluatedby way of (10.78)(10.80). A computer programto
evaluate(10.68) for themultipathconditions speciedwas writtenincomplex, double-
precisionarithmetic.
Figure10-31showsaplot of theoutput residuepower wheretheresultingminimum
possiblevalueof canceledpower output indB isplottedasafunctionof B for various
FIGURE 10-31
Decibel cancellation
versus B for
multipath.
Evaluated
with
B =
BD
m
= 0.45
R
m
= 0.5
1
78
N = 3
N = 1
N = number of taps
N = 5
N = 7
50
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.3
40
30
C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
20
10
0
B
speciedvalues of N. It will benotedin Figure10-31that for N = 1thecancellation
performanceisindependent of Bsincenointertapdelaysarepresent withonlyasingle
tap. AsexplainedinAppendixB, thetransfer functionof thetappeddelaylinetransversal
lter hasaperiodic structurewith(radian) frequency period2B
f
, whichiscenteredat
thefrequency f
0
. It should benoted that thetransversal lter frequency bandwidth B
f
is not necessarily thesameas thesignal-frequency bandwidth B. Thetransfer function
of a transversal lter within the primary frequency band (| f f
0
| < B
f
/2) may be
expressedas
F( f ) =
N
k=1
[A
k
e
j
k
]exp[j 2(k1) f ] (10.90)
where A
k
e
j
k
represents thekthcomplex weight, f = f f
0
, f
0
= center frequency,
andthetransversal lter frequencybandwidthis
B
f
=
1
(10.91)
Sincethetransversal lter shouldbecapableof adjustingthecomplexweightstoachieve
appropriateamplitudeandphasevaluesover theentiresignal bandwidthB, itfollowsthat
B
f
shouldsatisfy
B
f
B (10.92)
Consequently, themaximumintertapdelayspacingisgivenby
max
=
1
B
(10.93)
It follows that values of B that are greater than unity should not be considered for
practical compensationdesigns; however, valuesof B
f
> B (resultingin0< B < 1)
aresometimesdesirable.
Figure10-31showsthat, asBdecreasesfrom1, forvaluesof N > 1thecancellation
performance rapidly improves (the minimumcanceled residue power decreases) until
B = BD
m
(0.45 for this example), after which very little signicant improvement
occurs. AsBbecomesverymuchsmallerthanBD
m
(approachingzero), thecancellation
performancedegradessincetheintertapdelayiseffectivelyremoved.Thesimulationcould
not computethisresult sinceas B approacheszerothematrixR
xx
(0) becomessingular
andmatrixinversionbecomesimpossible.Cancellationperformanceof 30dBisvirtually
assuredif thetransversal lter hasat least vetapsand isselectedsothat = D
m
.
Supposeforexamplethatthetransversal lterisdesignedwithB = 0.45. Usingthe
samesetof selectedconstantsasforthepreviousexample,wendituseful toconsiderwhat
resultswouldbeobtainedwhentheactual multipathdelayisdifferentfromtheanticipated
valuecorrespondingtoBD
m
= 0.45. FromtheresultsalreadyobtainedinFigure10-31, it
maybeanticipatedthat, if BD
m
> B, thenthecancellationperformancewoulddegrade.
If, however, BD
m
B, thenthecancellationperformancewouldimprovesinceinthe
limit as D
m
0thesystemperformancewithnomultipathpresent wouldresult.
10.5.4 Results for Compensation of Array Propagation Delay
Intheabsenceof amultipathray,theanalysispresentedintheprecedingsectionincludesall
thefeaturesnecessarytoaccountforarraypropagationdelayeffects. Whenweset
m
= 0
andlet
12
= representtheelement-to-elementarraypropagationdelay, (10.78)(10.80)
permit(10.68) tobeusedtoinvestigatetheeffectsof arraypropagationdelayoncancella-
tionperformance. Onthebasisof thebehavior alreadyfoundfor multipathcompensation,
it wouldbereasonabletoanticipatethat withB = B thenmaximumcancellationper-
formancewouldobtain, whereas if B > B thenthecancellationperformancewould
degrade. Figure10-32givestheresultingcancellationperformanceasafunctionof B
for xed B. Thenumber of taps N is an independent parameter, and all other system
constantsarethesameasthoseintheexampleof Section10.4.3. Itisseenthattheresults
conrmtheanticipatedperformancenotedalready.
Evaluate with
no multipath
N

=

3
N = 1
N = number of taps
N

=

5
70
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.3
60
50
C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
20
B
B =
1
78
FIGURE 10-32
versus B for array
propagation delay.
10.6 ANALYSIS OF INTERCHANNEL
MISMATCH EFFECTS
Any adaptive array processor is susceptible to unavoidable frequency-dependent vari-
ations in gain and phase between the various element channels. Additional degrees of
freedomprovidedbyatappeddelaylinecompensateforsuchfrequency-dependentchan-
nel mismatch effects. Sinceasimpletwo-element CSLC systemexhibitsall thesalient
characteristicsof channel mismatchingpresentinmorecomplexsystems, thetwo-element
model isagainadoptedastheexamplefor performanceevaluationof channel mismatch
compensation.
Figure10-33isasimpliedrepresentationof asingleauxiliarychannel CSLCsystem
in which the single complex weight is a function of frequency. The transfer function
T
0
(, ) reects all amplitude and phase variations in the main beamsidelobes as a
functionof frequency aswell asany trackingerrorsinamplitudeandphasebetweenthe
mainandauxiliarychannel electronics. Likewise, theequivalent transfer functionfor the
auxiliarychannel (includinganyauxiliaryantennavariations) isdenotedbyT
1
(, ). The
spectral power density of awideband jammer is given by
J J
(). Thesignal fromthe
auxiliarychannel ismultiplied bythecomplexweight w
1
= e
j
, andthecancelled
output of residuepower spectral densityisrepresentedby
rr
(, ).
Theobjectiveof theCSLCistominimizetheresiduepower, appropriatelyweighted,
over thebandwidth. Sincetheintegral of thepower spectral density over thesignal fre-
quencyspectrumyieldsthesignal power, therequirement tominimizetheresiduepower
isexpressedas
Min
w
1
_

rr
(, )d (10.94)
where
rr
(, ) = |T
0
(, ) w
1
T
1
(, )|
2
J J
() (10.95)
Nowreplacethecomplex weight w
1
inFigure10-33by atappeddelay linehaving
2N + 1adaptively controlledcomplex weights eachseparatedby atimedelay as in
Figure10-34. A delayelementof valueNisincludedinthemainchannel (justasinthe
precedingsection) so that compensationfor bothpositiveandnegativeangles of arrival
isprovided. Themainandauxiliarychannel transfer functionsarewrittenintermsof the
outputof themainchannel, sonodelaytermsoccur intheresultingmainchannel transfer
FIGURE 10-33
Simplied model of
single-channel
CSLC.
w
1
S(w)
d
T
0
(w, q)
+
q
Main channel
T
1
(w, q)
R

(w, q)
Auxiliary channel
Adaptive
electronics
10.6 Analysisof Interchannel MismatchEffects 407
T
0
(w) e
jwN
e
jw
e
jw
+
Main
channel
Residue
Auxiliary
channel
N delay elements
w
1
w
1
w
N+1
w
2N+1
A()
F(w) = A
(w)
N delay elements
e
jw
F() = wN+1+k e
jwk
N
k = N
FIGURE 10-34
Single-channel
CSLC having main
channel distortion
and tapped delay
line auxiliary channel
compensation.
function, A(). Assumefor analysispurposesthatall channel distortionisconnedtothe
mainchannel andthat T
1
(, ) = 1. Thetransversal lter transfer function, F(), canbe
expressedas
F() =
N
k=N
w
N+1+k
e
j k
(10.96)
wherethew
N+1+k
sarenonfrequency-dependent complexweights.
Wewant tominimizetheoutput residuepower over thesignal bandwidthby appro-
priately selecting theweight vector w. Assuming thejammer power spectral density is
constant over thefrequencyregionof interest, thenminimizingtheoutput residuepower
is equivalent to selectingthe F() that provides thebest estimate(denotedby

A())
of themainchannel transfer functionover thatfrequencyrange. If theestimate

A() isto
beoptimal intheMSE sense, thentheerror inthisestimatee() = A() F() must
beorthogonal to

A() = F(), that is,
E{[A() F()]F
()} = 0 (10.97)
wheretheexpectationE{} istakenover frequencyandisthereforeequivalent to
E{} =
1
2B
_
B
B
{ } d (10.98)
whereall frequency-dependent elementsintheintegrandof (10.98) arereducedtobase-
band. Letting A() = A
0
()e
j
0
()
, substituting(10.96) into(10.97), andrequiringthe
error tobeorthogonal toall tapoutputstoobtaintheminimumMSE estimate

A() then
yieldsthecondition
E{[A
0
() exp[j
0
()] F()] exp( j k)} = 0 for k = N, . . . , 0, . . . , N
(10.99)
Equation(10.99) canberewrittenas
E{A
0
() exp[j (k
0
()]} E
__
N
l=N
W
N+1+l
exp(j l)
_
exp( j k)
_
= 0 for k = N, . . . , 0, . . . , N
(10.100)
Notethat
E{exp[j (l k)]} =
sin[B(l k)]
B(l k)
(10.101)
it followsthat
E
__
N
l=N
W
N+1+l
exp(j l)
_
exp( j l)
_
=
N
l=N
W
N+1+l
sin[B(l k)]
B(l k)
(10.102)
sothat (10.100) canberewritteninmatrixformas
v= Cw (10.103)
where
v
k
= E{A
0
() exp[j (k
0
())]} (10.104)
C
k,l
=
sin[B(l k)]
B(l k)
(10.105)
Consequently, thecomplexweight vector must satisfytherelation
w= C
1
v (10.106)
Using(10.106) tosolvefor theoptimumcomplex weight vector, wecanndtheoutput
residuesignal power byusing
R
ee
(0) =
1
2B
_
B
B
| A() F()|
2
J J
()d (10.107)
where
J J
() istheconstantinterferencesignal power spectral density. Assumetheinter-
ferencepower spectral density isunity acrossthebandwidthof concern; thentheoutput
residuepower dueonlytomainchannel amplitudevariationsisgivenby
R
ee
A
=
1
2B
_
B
B
| A
0
() F()|
2
d (10.108)
SinceA() F() isorthogonal to F(), it followsthat [15]
E{| A() F()|
2
} = E{| A()|
2
} E{|F()|
2
} (10.109)
andhence
R
ee
A
=
1
2B
_
B
B
[A
2
0
() |F()|
2
]d (10.110)
It likewisefollowsfrom(10.107) that theoutput residuepower contributedby main
channel phasevariationsisgivenby
R
ee
p
=
1
2B
_
B
B
|e
j
0
()
F()|
2
J J
() d (10.111)
where
0
() represents the main channel phase variation. Once again assuming that
the input signal spectral density is unity across the signal bandwidth and noting that
[e
j
0
()
F()] must beorthogonal to F(), it immediatelyfollowsthat
R
ee
p
=
1
2B
_
B
B
[1|F()|
2
]d
= 1
N
j =N
N
k=N
w
k
w
j
sin[B(k j )]
B(k j )
(10.112)
wherethecomplexweight vector elementsmust satisfy(10.103)(10.106).
If it is desired to evaluate the effects of both amplitude and phase mismatching
simultaneously, then the appropriate expression for the output residue power is given
by(10.107), which(becauseof orthogonality) mayberewrittenas
R
ee
(0) =
1
2B
_
B
B
{| A()|
2
|F()|
2
}
J J
() d (10.113)
wherethecomplex weights used to obtain F() must again satisfy (10.102)(10.106),
whichnowinvolvebothamagnitudeandaphasecomponentanditisassumedthat
J J
()
isaconstant.
10.6.1 Example: Effects of Amplitude Mismatching
Toevaluate(10.110) it isnecessarytoadopt achannel amplitudemodel correspondingto
A(). Onepossiblechannel amplitudemodel isgiveninFigure10-35for which
A() =
_
1+ RcosT
0
for || B
0 otherwise
(10.114)
B 0
1
Array bandwidth
B
A(w)
R
FIGURE 10-35
Channel amplitude
model having 3
1
2
cycles of ripple for
evaluation of
amplitude mismatch
effects.
where
T
0
=
2n+1
2B
for n= 0, 1, 2, . . .
andtheinteger ncorrespondsto(2n+1)/2cyclesof amplitudemismatchingacrossthe
bandwidthB. Lettingthephaseerror
0
() = 0, it followsfrom(10.104) that
v
k
=
1
2B
_
B
B
[1+ RcosT
0
]e
j k
d (10.115)
or
v
k
=
sin(Bk)
Bk
+
R
2
_
sin(B[T
0
+k])
B[T
0
+k]
+
sin(B[T
0
k])
B[T
0
k]
_
for k = N, . . . , 0, . . . , N (10.116)
Evaluationof (10.116) permitsthecomplexweightvector tobefound, whichinturnmay
beusedtodeterminetheresiduepower bywayof (10.110).
Now
|F()|
2
= F() F
() = w
w (10.117)
where
=
e
j N
e
j (N1)
.
.
.
e
j N
(10.118)
Carryingout thevector multiplicationsindicatedby(10.117) thenyields
|F()|
2
=
2N+1
i =1
2N+1
k=1
w
i
w
k
e
j (ki )
(10.119)
Theoutput residuepower isthereforegivenby[seeequation(10.110)]
R
ee
A
=
_
B
B
[1+ RcosT
0
]
2
d
_
B
B
2N+1
i =1
2N+1
k=1
w
i
w
k
e
j (ki )
d (10.120)
Equation(10.120) maybeevaluatedusingthefollowingexpressions:
1
2B
_
B
B
[1+ RcosT
0
]
2
d =
_
1+
R
2
2
_
+2R
sin[(2n+1)/2]
[(2n+1)/2]
+
R
2
2
sin(2n+1)
(2n+1)
(10.121)
1
2B
_
B
B
2N+1
i =1
2N+1
k=1
w
i
w
k
e
j (ki )
d =
2N+1
i =1
2N+1
k=1
w
i
w
k
sin(ki )B
(ki )B
(10.122)
10.6.2 Results for Compensation of Selected
Amplitude Mismatch Model
Theevaluationof (10.120) requiresknowingtherippleamplitudeR, thenumber of cycles
of amplitudemismatchingacrossthebandwidth, andtheproduct of B (whereBisthe
cancellationbandwidthand is theintertapdelay spacing). Theresults of acomputer
evaluationof theoutputresiduepower aresummarizedinFigures10-3610-39for B =
0.25, 0.5, 0.75, and1, and R = 0.09. Eachof thegures presents aplot of thedecibel
cancellation(of theundesiredinterferencesignal) achievedas afunctionof thenumber
of taps in the transversal lter and the number of cycles of ripple present across the
cancellationbandwidth. Noimprovement(over thecancellationthatcanbeachievedwith
only one tap) is realized until a sufcient number of taps is present in the transversal
lter to achievetheresolutionrequiredby theamplitudeversus frequency variations in
For B = 0.25 and R
m
= 0.09
N = number of taps
70
0 5 10 15
60
50
C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
20
3 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
1 Cycles
1
2 Cycle
1
2
FIGURE 10-36
versus number of
taps for selected
amplitude mismatch
models with
B = 0.25.
For B = 0.5 and R
m
= 0.09
N = number of taps
70
0 5 10 15
60
50 C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
3 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
1 Cycles
1
2 Cycle
1
2
20
FIGURE 10-37
versus number of
taps for selected
amplitude mismatch
models with
B = 0.5.
FIGURE 10-38
versus number of
taps for selected
amplitude mismatch
models with
B = 0.75.
For B = 0.75 and R
m
= 0.09
N = number of taps
70
0 5 10 15
60
50 C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
3 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
1 Cycles
1
2
Cycle
1
2
20
FIGURE 10-39
versus number of
taps for selected
amplitude mismatch
models with
B = 1.0.
For B = 1.0 and R
m
= 0.09
N = number of taps
70
0 5 10 15
60
50 C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
3 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
1 Cycles
1
2
Cycle
1
2
20
theamplitudemismatchmodel. Thesufcient number of tapsfor theselectedamplitude
mismatchmodel wasfoundempiricallytobegivenby
N
sufcient
_
N
r
1
2
_
[74(B)] +1 (10.123)
whereN
r
isthenumber of half-cyclesof rippleappearinginthemismatchmodel.
If thereareasufcientnumber of tapsinthetransversal lter, thecancellationperfor-
manceimproveswhenmoretapsareaddeddependingonhowwell theresultingtransfer
function of the transversal lter matches the gain and phase variations of the channel
mismatchmodel. Sincethetransversal lter transfer functionresolutiondependsinpart
ontheproduct B, ajudicious selectionof this parameter ensures that providingaddi-
tional tapsprovidesabetter match(andhenceasignicant improvement incancellation
performance), whereasapoor choiceresultsinverypoor transfer functionmatchingeven
withtheadditionof moretaps.
For N = 3 and R
m
= 0.9
B
0 0.5 1 1.5
150
100
50
20
10
C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
0
FIGURE 10-40
versus B for
one-half-cycle
amplitude mismatch
model.
TakingtheinverseFourier transformof (10.114)
1
{A()} yields atimefunction
correspondingtoanautocorrelationfunction f (t) that canbeexpressedas
f (t) = s(t) +Ks(t T
0
) (10.124)
Theresultsof Section10.5.3andequation(10.124)implythat = T
0
(orequivalently,
B = number cyclesof ripplemismatch) if theproduct B istomatch theamplitude
mismatchmodel. This result is illustratedinFigure10-40wheredecibel cancellationis
plottedversus B for aone-half-cycleripplemismatchmodel. A pronouncedminimum
occursat B =
1
2
for N = 3and R
m
= 0.9.
When the number of cycles of mismatch ripple exceeds unity, the foregoing rule
of thumb leads to the spurious conclusion that B should exceed unity. Suppose, for
example, thereweretwocyclesof mismatchrippleforwhichitwasdesiredtocompensate.
BysettingB = 2(correspondingto B
f
=
1
2
B), twocompletecyclesfor thetransversal
lter transfer functionarefoundtooccur acrossthecancellationbandwidth. Bymatching
only one cycle of the channel mismatch, quite good matching of the entire mismatch
characteristicoccursbut at thepriceof sacricingtheabilitytoindependentlyadjust the
complex weights across theentirecancellation bandwidth, thereby reducing theability
to appropriately process broadband signals. Consequently, if the number of cycles of
mismatchrippleexceeds unity, it is usually best to set B = 1andto accept whatever
improvementincancellationperformancecanbeobtainedwiththatvalue, or increasethe
number of taps.
10.6.3 Example: Effects of Phase Mismatching
Let () correspondingtothephaseerror becharacterizedby
() =
_
AcosT
0
for || B
0 otherwise
(10.125)
whereA represents thepeak number of degrees associatedwiththephaseerror ripples.
This model corresponds to theerror ripplemodel of (10.112) (with zero averagevalue
present).
Since
v
k
=
1
2B
_
B
B
exp( j {AcosT
0
+k}) d for k = N, . . . , 0, . . . , N
(10.126)
it caneasilybeshownbydening
f (K, sgn)

=
sin[K +sgn (i (N +1))B]
[K +sgn (i (N +1))B]
andg(K)

= f (K, +) + f (K, ) that
v
i
= J
0
(A) f (0, +) + j J
1
(A)g
_
2n+1
2
_
(10.127)
+
k=1
(1)
k
_
J
2k
(A)g[k(2n+1)] + j J
2k+1
(A)g
_
(2k+1)
_
2n+1
2
___
whereJ
n
() denotesaBessel functionof thenthorder for i = 1, 2, . . . , 2N +1.
10.6.4 Results for Compensation of Selected Phase
Mismatch Model
Thecomputer evaluationof theoutput residuepower resultedintheperformancesum-
marized in Figures 10-4110-43 for B = 0.2, 0.45, and 1.0 and A = 5
. These
gures present the decibel cancellation achieved as a function of the number of taps
inthetransversal lter andthenumber of cycles of phaseripplepresent across thecan-
cellationbandwidth. Thegeneral natureof thecurvesappearinginFigures10-4110-43
isthesameasthat of Figures10-3610-39for amplitudemismatching. Furthermore, just
asintheamplitudemismatchcase, abetter channel transfer functiont canbeobtained
withthetransversal lter whenthemismatchcharacteristichasafewer number of ripples.
FIGURE 10-41
versus number of
taps for selected
phase mismatch
models with
B = 0.2.
For B = 0.2 and A = 5
N = number of taps
70
0 5 3 1 7
60
50 C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
6 &
1
2
10 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
Cycle
1
2
20
10.7 SummaryandConclusions 415
For B = 0.45 and A = 5
N = number of taps
70
0 5 3 1 7
60
50 C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
6 &
1
2
10 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
Cycle
1
2
20
FIGURE 10-42
versus number of
taps for selected
phase mismatch
models with
B = 0.45.
For B = 1 and A = 5
N = number of taps
0 5 3 1 7
60
50
C
a
n
c
e
l
l
a
t
i
o
n

(
d
B
)
40
30
10
6 &
1
2
10 Cycles
1
2
2 Cycles
1
2
Cycle
1
2
20
FIGURE 10-43
versus number of
taps for selected
phase mismatch
models with
B = 1.0.
10.7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Arrayerrorsduetomanufacturingtolerancesdistort thearraypattern. Tominimizethese
errors, thearraymust becalibratedat thefactoryandat regular intervalsoncedeployed.
Thetransversal lter consistingof asequenceof weightedtaps withintertapdelay
spacingoffersapractical meansfor achievingthevariableamplitudeandphaseweighting
as a function of frequency that is required if an adaptive array systemis to perform
well against wideband interference signal sources. The distortionless channel transfer
functionsfor atwo-elementarraywerederived. Itwasfoundthattoensuredistortion-free
responsetoabroadbandsignal thechannel phaseisalinearfunctionof frequency, whereas
thechannel amplitudefunctionis nearly at over a40%bandwidth. Quadraturehybrid
processingprovides adequatebroadbandsignal responsefor signals havingas muchas
20%bandwidth. Tappeddelay lineprocessingis apractical necessity for 20%or more
bandwidthsignals. A transversal lter providesanattractivemeansof compensatingthe
systemauxiliarychannelsfor theundesirableeffectsof thefollowing:
1. Multipathinterference
2. Interchannel mismatch
3. Propagationdelayacrossthearray
For multipathinterference, thevalueof theintertapdelay is intheneighborhoodof the
delay timeassociatedwiththemultipathray. If theintertapdelay timeexceedsthemul-
tipathdelay timeby morethanabout 30%andthemultipathdelay timeis appreciable,
asevereloss of compensation capability is incurred. If theintertap delay is too small,
thenanexcessivenumberof tapswill berequiredforeffectivecancellationtooccur. Since
multipathdelayhavingsmallvaluesof associatedtimedelaydonotseverelydegradethe
arrayperformance, itisreasonabletodeterminethemostlikelyvaluesof multipathdelay
thatwill occur for thedesiredapplicationandbasethemultipathcompensationdesignon
thosedelaytimes(assumingB 1). For reectioncoefcientsof 0.5andBD
m
= 0.45,
theuseof vetapswill ensurea30dB cancellationcapability.
TheresultsshowninFigures10-31and10-32indicatethat array propagationdelay
effects are usually much easier to compensate than are multipath effects. This result
occursbecausemultipathineffect introducestwo(or more) signalsineachchannel (that
are essentially uncorrelated if BD
m
1), which require more degrees of freedomto
adequatelycompensate.
Theproblempresentedbyinterchannel mismatchistoobtainatransfer functionwith
the transversal lter that succeeds in matching the amplitude and phase error charac-
teristics exhibited among thevarious sensor channels. As might beexpected, themore
severethemismatchingbetweenchannels, themoredifcultitistoachieveanacceptable
degreeof compensation. Inparticular, it ishighlyundesirablefor morethan2
1
2
cyclesof
mismatchrippletooccur over thecancellationbandwidth; eventhisdegreeof mismatch
requiresseventapsonthetransversal lterbeforeatrulyeffectivedegreeof compensation
can beachieved. It may very well result that thebest choiceof intertap delay spacing
for theinterchannel mismatchcharacteristicof concernisfar different fromtheoptimum
choiceof intertapdelay selectedfor multipathcompensation; shouldthisactually occur,
it is necessary toadopt acompromisevaluefor theintertapdelay spacing. Suchacom-
promisevaluefor theintertapdelay spacinghopefully resultsinanacceptabledegreeof
compensationfor bothmultipathandinterchannel mismatcheffects.
10.8 PROBLEMS
DistortionlessTransfer Functions
1. From(10.11) and(10.12) it immediatelyfollowsthat |H
1
() = |H
2
()|, therebyyieldingthe
pair of equations
f
1
{|H
1
|,
1
,
2
,
s
} = exp(j T
1
)
and
f
2
{|H
1
|,
1
,
2
,
i
} = 0
(a) Showfromthepreviouspair of equationsthat
1
() and
2
() must satisfy
2
()
1
() =

0
sin
i
n
wherenisanyoddinteger.
10.8 Problems 417
(b) Sincethemagnitudeof exp(j T
1
) must beunity, showusing f
1
{ } = exp(j T
1
) that
(10.13) results.
(c) Showthat theangleconditionassociatedwith f
1
{ } = exp(j T
1
) yields(10.14).
(d) Showthat substituting(10.14) intotheresultsfrompart (a) yields(10.15).
2. For athree-elementlinear array, theoverall transfer functionencounteredbythedesiredsignal
inpassingthroughthearrayis
H
d
() = H
1
() + H
2
() exp
_
j
d
c
sin
s
_
+ H
3
()e
_
j
2d
c
sin
s
_
andtheoverall transfer functionseenbytheinterferencesignal is
H
I
() = H
1
() + H
2
() exp
_
j
d
c
sin
i
_
+ H
3
()e
_
j
2d
c
sin
i
_
What does imposing the requirements (10.9) and (10.10) now imply for the three-channel
transfer functions?
Hilbert TransformRelations
3. ProvetheHilbert transformrelationsgivenby(10.25)(10.28).
4. Using(10.61), (10.62), andtheresultsof (10.63)(10.65), showthat R
ee
isgivenby(10.66).
5. Derivethecorrelationfunctionsgivenby(10.78)(10.80) for thesignal environment assump-
tions(10.75) and(10.76)
6. Showthatasthetimebandwidthproduct Bapproacheszero, thenthematrixR
xx
(0) [whose
elements aregivenby (10.80)] becomes singular so that matrix inversioncannot beaccom-
plished.
Compensationfor Channel PhaseErrors
7. For thephaseerror () givenby (10.125), showthat v
k
givenby (10.127) followsfromthe
applicationof (10.126).
8. Let () correspondtothephaseerror model begivenby
() =
_
A
_
1cos
2
B
for || B
0 otherwise
Showthat v
k
of (10.126) isgivenby
v
k
=
_
B
B
_
cos
_
A
_
1cos
2
B
__
+ j sin
_
A
_
1cos
2
B
___
exp( j k
d
)
Usethetrigonometricidentities
cos
_
A Acos
2
B
_
= cosAcos
_
Acos
2
B
_
+sinAsin
_
Acos
2
B
_
sin
_
A Acos
2
B
_
= sinAcos
_
Acos
2
B
_
cosAsin
_
Acos
2
B
_
andthefact that
cos(AcosT
0
) = J
0
(A) +2

k=1
(1)
k
J
2k
(A) cos[(2k)T
0
]
sin(AcosT
0
) = 2

k=0
(1)
k
J
2k+1
(A) cos[(2k+1)T
0
]
whereJ
n
() denotesaBessel functionof thenthorder anddene
f (n, sgn)

=
sin[n+sgn (i (N +1))B]
[n+sgn (i (N +1))B]
g(n)

= f (n, +) + f (n, )
toshowthat
v
i
= J
0
(A) f (0, +)[cosA+ j sinA] + J
1
(A) g(2)[sinA j cosA]
+
k=1
(1)
k
{J
2k
(A) g(4k)[cosA+ j sinA]
+ J
2k+1
(A) g[(2k+1)2][sinA j cosA]}
for i = 1, 2, . . . , 2N +1
9. Let () correspondingtothephaseerror model begivenby
() =
_
b
2
(B ||) for || B
0 otherwise
Asbefore, it followsthat
v
i
=
1
2B
_
B
B
exp{ j [b
2
(B ||) +i ]} d
Lettingu = /B, applyingEulersformula, andignoringall oddcomponentsof theresulting
expression, showthat
v
i
=
_
1
0
exp
_
j
_
27A
4
u
2
(1u)
__
cos[u(i (N +1))B]du
whereA = 4b(B/3)
3
fori = 1, 2, . . . , 2N+1. Theforegoingequationforv
i
canbeevaluated
numericallytodeterminetheoutputresiduepower contributionduetothepreviousphaseerror
model.
Computer SimulationProblems
10. A 30-element linear array(d = 0.5) hasa20dB, n= 2Taylor taper appliedat theelements.
Plot thearrayfactor when
a
n
= 0.1and
a
n
= 0.1.
11. A 30-element linear array (d = 0.5) has a30dB, n = 7lowsidelobetaper. Plot thearray
factorsfor asingleelement failureat (1) theedgeand(2) thecenter of thearray.
12. Findthelocationandheightsof thequantizationlobesfor a20-element array withd = 0.5
andthebeamsteeredto = 3
whenthephaseshiftershavethree, four, andvebits.

10.9 References 419
10.9 REFERENCES
[1] E. Brookner, AntennaArrayFundamentalsPart2, Practical PhasedArrayAntennaSystems,
E. Brookner, ed., Norwood, MA, ArtechHouse, 1991
[2] R.J . Mailloux, Array Grating Lobes Due to Periodic Phase, Amplitude, and Time Delay
Quantization, IEEE AP-STrans., Vol. 32, December 1984, pp. 13641368.
[3] A. J . Boonstra, and A. J . van der Veen, Gain Calibration Methods for Radio Telescope
Arrays, IEEE Signal ProcessingTrans., Vol. 51, No. 1, 2003, pp. 2538.
[4] R. Sorace, PhasedArrayCalibration,IEEE AP-STrans., Vol. 49, No. 4, 2001, pp. 517525.
[5] T. Takahashi, Y. Konishi, S. Makino, et al., Fast Measurement Techniquefor PhasedArray
Calibration, IEEE AP-STrans., Vol. 56, No. 7, 2008, pp. 18881899.
[6] M. Borkowski, Solid-State Transmitters, Radar Handbook, M. I. Skolnick, ed.,
pp. 11.111.36, NewYork, McGrawHill, 2008.
[7] N. Tyler, B. Allen, andH. Aghvami, AdaptiveAntennas: TheCalibrationProblem, IEEE
CommunicationsMagazine, Vol. 42, No. 12, 2004, pp. 114122.
[8] N.Tyler,B.Allen,andA.H.Aghvami,Calibrationof SmartAntennaSystems:Measurements
andResults, IET Microwaves, Antennas& Propagation, Vol. 1, No. 3, 2007, pp. 629638.
[9] R. L. Haupt, AntennaArrays: AComputational Approach, NewYork, Wiley, 2010.
[10] W. T. Patton and L. H. Yorinks, Near-Field Alignment of Phased-Array Antennas, IEEE
AP-STrans., Vol. 47, No. 3, 1999, pp. 584591.
[11] W. E. RodgersandR. T. Compton, J r., TappedDelay-LineProcessinginAdaptiveArrays,
Report 3576-3, April 1974, preparedby TheOhioStateUniversity ElectroScienceLabora-
tory, Department of Electrical Engineeringunder Contract N00019-73-C-0195for Naval Air
SystemsCommand.
[12] W. E. Rodgers and R. T. Compton, J r., Adaptive Array Bandwidth with Tapped Delay-
LineProcessing, Report 3832-3, May1975, preparedbyTheOhioStateUniversityElectro
ScienceLaboratory, Departmentof Electrical EngineeringunderContractN00019-74-C-0141
for Naval Air SystemsCommand.
[13] W. E. Rodgers and R. T. Compton, J r., Adaptive Array Bandwidth with Tapped Delay-
LineProcessing, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., Vol. AES-15, No. 1, J anuary 1979,
pp. 2128.
[14] T. G. Kincaid, The Complex Representation of Signals, General Electric Report No.
R67EMH5, October 1966, HMEDPublications, Box 1122(LeMoyneAve.), Syracuse, NY,
13201.
[15] A. Papoulis, Probability, Random Variables, and Stochastic Processes, New York,
McGraw-Hill, 1965, Ch. 7.
[16] H. Steyskal & J . Herd, Mutual Coupling Compensation in Small Array Antennas, IEEE
Trans. Ant. & Prop., Vol. AP-38, No. 12, December 1995, pp. 603606.
[17] R. A. Monzingo, Transversal Filter Implementation of Wideband Weight Compensation
for CSLC Applications, unpublished Hughes Aircraft Interdepartmental Correspondence
Ref. No. 78-1450.10/07, March1978.
[18] A. M. Vural, Effects of Perturbations on thePerformanceof Optimum/AdaptiveArrays,
IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., Vol. AES-15, No. 1, J anuary1979, pp. 7687.

Compensation of Adaptive Arrays - 10

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Compensation of Adaptive Arrays - 10

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Monzingo-7200014 book ISBN: XXXXXXXXXX November 24, 2010 19:46 373

12. Thequantization error is randomonly

12. Substitutingthiserror into(b) yieldsthermssidelobelevel.

when the phase shifters

C without recalibration in-

), where it is seen that the amplitude of the

Thereferencesignal equalsthedesiredsignal componentof x

Monzingo-7200014 book ISBN: XXXXXXXXXX November 24, 2010 19:46 391

off broadside, because

or greater. For ideal channel processing,

, and theinterelement spacing is d = 2.25

whenthephaseshiftershavethree, four, andvebits.

You might also like