See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261567226

Testing ourselves: Radar cross section (RCS) measurements

Article  in  IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine · December 2013

DOI: 10.1109/MAP.2013.6781745

CITATIONS READS

10 2,605

3 authors, including:

Levent Sevgi Irfan Majid

Istanbul Okan University Institute of Space Technology
286 PUBLICATIONS   3,182 CITATIONS    17 PUBLICATIONS   67 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Diffraction at Rounded Wedges View project

Modeling of Microwave Devices and Systems using Computational Intelligence Techniques View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Levent Sevgi on 18 April 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Testing Ourselves

Levent Sevgi
Doğuş University
Electronics and Communications Eng. Dept.
Zeamet Sokak, No 21, Acibadem — Kadiköy
Istanbul - Turkey
E-mail: lsevgi@dogus.edu.tr, levent.sevgi@ieee.org
http://www3.dogus.edu.tr/lsevgi

T he tutorial in this issue is reserved for classical radar cross

section (RCS) measurements. The follow-up tutorial, on
software-controlled novel RCS measurement approaches, will
He was very excited to do one of his projects there with our
MATLAB-based antenna-array tool. I was happy to receive
this feedback. I know they have been used all around, from
hopefully be ready for the April 2014 issue. Brian Fisher, one China to Europe, Africa to America. This is the power of the
of the Associate Editors of the Measurement Corner, has been IEEE, our Society, and the Magazine. Those of you who use
working on that. We’ll also have more interesting quizzes and these tools and tutorials, please send us your inputs and com-
tutorials in the year 2014. ments. We need your valuable feedback! Also, those of you
who are experts in these areas, please don’t forget that there
The Erasmus Program (European Community Action are members and student members out there who do not have
Scheme for the Mobility of University Students) is a European easy access to lecturers/trainers like you, so this is our social
Union (EU) student/lecturer exchange program, established in endeavor to assist those members. Please go ahead and e-mail
1987. Departments from different EU countries’ universities us your tutorial proposals. Note that the keyword of the tutorials
collaborate and sign mutual agreements, and exchange stu- is simplicity: try to keep it as simple as possible.
dents/lecturers. Students who join this program study in another
European country for a semester or two. The Erasmus Program
guarantees that the period spent abroad is recognized by the The Quiz for This issue
student’s university when they come back, as long as they
abide by terms previously agreed upon. Lecturer exchanges
We have had useful and fruitful discussions on fundamen-
are usually for a week or two (at most, a month) for several
tal terms and definitions lately during our joint studies and
hours of short courses/tutorials. Millions of students and
“comment-reply” exchanges. Improper use of terminology
several thousands of lecturers have joined this program for the
might seem to be a minor flaw, but everything starts with clear
last few decades. They have interacted not only scientifically,
definitions, and the precise use of terms and concepts. The quiz
but also culturally and socially (I have already visited several
in this issue is related to these discussions.
universities in Italy and Spain within this program). The aim is
to establish a multi-cultural/united/rich EU in the future, and
1. A line-source concept is used instead of a point source when,
Erasmus students will hopefully be the building blocks towards
for example, a Green’s function problem in three dimensions
that.
(3D) is reduced into two dimensions. Which of the following
are equivalent?
One of our students visited Lublin University of Technol-
ogy in Poland last year, spent a successful academic year there,
A. We assume the structure is invariant along z or,
and has just come back. He told me that he was surprised but
mathematically, ∂ ∂z ≡ 0 .
happy to see that the tutorials and virtual tools that we have
introduced in this column are used in various lectures there.

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 277

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 277 3/7/2014 2:50:59 PM

 B. Suppose the problem is symmetric according to z. D. There are both uniform and nonuniform asymptotic
solutions of this problem.
C. A continuous translational symmetry is assumed
along z. E. The scattered field around a wedge type discontinu-
ity contains all the (incident, reflected, and dif-
fracted) fields on the illuminated side, but only dif-
2. Which of the following statements are not properly phrased? fracted fields appear in the shadow region.

A. As shown in Figure 3, the exact Geometric Optic
(GO) solution agrees very well with the asymptotic
GO solution.
B. The uniform exact solution in Figure 5 matches with
the GO asymptotics as expected.
C. The failure of the Geometrical Theory of Diffraction
(GTD) model near critical angles is removed by the
Uniform Theory of Diffraction (UTD) model.
F. Both FDTD and MoM-based measurement results
agree very well with the analytical exact solution.
G. Analytical exact solutions may or may not serve as
reference!
H. The exact solution shall agree with its asymptotics
when related parameter goes to infinity.

Radar Cross Section (RCS) Measurements

Levent Sevgi1, Zubair Rafiq2, and Irfan Majid2
1
Department of Electronics and Communications Engineering
Dogus University
Istanbul, 34722, Turkey
E-mail: lsevgi@dogus.edu.tr

2
Radar Technology Center
Center of Excellence for Applied Science & Technology
Islamabad, Pakistan
E-mail: zubairrafiq@msn.com, imajid@ieee.org

Abstract

The radar cross section (RCS) is a critical parameter that describes the electromagnetic wave – target interaction.
Its accurate prediction has long been a hot research and engineering topic. Today, RCS prediction of real targets is
achieved via either numerical simulations or measurements. Here, indoor RCS measurements are reviewed in a tutorial.

Keywords: Radar reflectivity; radar cross section; RCS; indoor measurement; compact range; calibration; sphere; Mie
series; numerical simulations; scattering; diffraction; MATLAB

278 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 278 3/7/2014 2:51:00 PM

 1. Introduction

E lectromagnetic (EM) waves scatter when they interact

with objects. In radar engineering, this is known as target
reflectivity, and is represented by the critical parameter called
the radar cross section (RCS). The qualitative observation that
radio waves are scattered by almost everything has been known
since Hertz’s first experiments with radio waves, but studies
on radar reflectivity and RCS prediction escalated during
World War II. Since then, the work in RCS engineering has
concentrated on measurements as well as numerical simulations
for broad frequency ranges, up to millimeter-wave bands [1-
11].

In early 1960, a comprehensive measurement program

was conducted by Ohio State University to characterize
bare ground, grass, snow, and pavement as a function of the
depression angle, frequency, and polarization [12]. Another
Figure 1. A basic RCS configuration.
important measurement program was conducted by the Good-
year Aircraft Corporation at X band [13].

At that time, significant research was conducted on the

theory of EM scattering. Institutions such as Syracuse Univer-
sity, the University of Michigan, the Ohio State University,
and Georgia Institute of Technology were involved in under-
standing the foundations of scattering, with the objective and
goal of better measurements, as well as being able to analyti-
cally and numerically predict the scattering from increasingly
complex objects. Many tools in current use, such as the Method
of Moments (MoM), the Geometrical Theory of Diffraction
(GTD), and Physical Optics (PO), were developed during this
period [1-11]. Indoor and outdoor RCS measurement facilities
were established, and key instruments, such as vector network
analyzers, were developed. Parallel to this progress, EM
scattering measurements with accuracies less 0.2 dBsm and
dynamic ranges of more than 130 dB have been achieved in
RCS measurements.
Indoor RCS measurement is reviewed in this tutorial.
First, the theory of radar reflectivity is summarized (see [14-
18]). The history of radar reflectivity measurements is then
presented [19-21]. The related IEEE standard is also reviewed
[22]. Measurement-facility calibration and the calibration of
test targets are outlined. Finally, some comparisons of meas-
urements and simulations are presented.
2. Radar Cross Section (RCS)
The RCS is a key parameter in measuring the high and/
or low observability of a target. It is defined and calculated or
measured from the target-scattered fields caused by an incident
plane wave hitting the target [1]:
2
2 Es
σ = lim 4π R 2
, (1)
R →∞ Ei
where R is the distance between the radar transmitter and the
target, and Es and Ei are the scattered and incident electric
fields, respectively ( Ei, s = Eθ or Ei, s = Eϕ ). The RCS is
expressed in units of square meters ( m 2 ) or in dB with respect
to a square meter (dBsm). Figure 1 sketches a typical RCS
measurement scenario. Here, the target is located at the center
of the coordinate system. In spherical coordinates, θ and ϕ are
the vertical and horizontal angles. The target is illuminated
from the transmitter, and the target-scattered field is recorded
by the receiver, both of which are in the far field. The terms
monostatic and bistatic RCS are used for the cases when the
transmitting and receiving antennas are collocated and apart
from each other, respectively.
Both the monostatic and bistatic RCS of a target can be
expressed as σ θθ , σ ϕϕ , σ θϕ or σ ϕθ , depending on the polari-
zation. Here, σ θθ or σ VV represents the case where the incident
and target-scattered fields are both vertical ( Ei, s = Eθ ).
Similarly, σ ϕϕ or σ HH belongs to the case where both fields
are horizontal ( Ei, s = Eϕ ). These two cases are known as the
co-polarized RCS. The other two cases are called the cross-
polarized RCS [3]. The target-scattering matrix is then given as
 EsH  σ HH σ VH   EiH 
 =  . (2)
 EsV  σ HV σ VH   E 
 iV 
The RCS of a target is a measure of its reflectivity in a given
direction. The main EM contributions are [23]:
• Specular scattering: Localized scattering depending
on the surface’s material/texture.

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 279

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 279 3/7/2014 2:51:00 PM

 • Diffraction: Scattering at the target’s edges, tips, and
other abrupt discontinuities.

• Multiple bounce: Reflections among target elements

at offset angles.

• Creeping waves: Waves that are diffracted around

the shadowed surface of a smooth body, such as a
sphere.

Note that the main RCS contributions usually come from for-
ward scattering and specular reflections. These are known as
primary EM effects. On the other hand, diffraction effects are
called secondary contributions, and are an order of magnitude
or two weaker than primary contributions.

The RCS is classified in terms of the target’s dimensions

(l) and radar wavelength ( λ ) relationships. The three RCS
frequency regions where qualitative as well as quantitative
differences occur are [1, 11]:

• Rayleigh region (low frequencies), where the tar-

get’s dimensions (l) are much less than the radar
wavelength ( l  λ ). In this region, the RCS is pro-
portional to the fourth power of frequency ( σ ∝ f 4  )
and to the square of the volume of the target  
2
( σ ∝ ( target volume ) ). Any target acts as a point
scatterer.

• Resonance region (medium frequencies), where the

target’s dimensions and the radar wavelength are of
the same order ( l ≈ λ ), and the geometry and mate-
rial of a target contributes to its RCS as a whole.
Most of the frequency- and time-domain numerical
methods are effective in this regime.

• Optical region (high frequencies), where the target’s

dimensions are very large compared to the radar
wavelength, which is of the order of centimeters
( l  λ ). The RCS of many targets of microwave
radars are in this regime, and these RCS values are
obtained through measurements.

Figure 2 shows the angular RCS variations of typical

targets in the resonance and optical regimes. The angle of
illumination must be stated for the bistatic RCS plots. As the
frequency increases, the angular RCS fluctuations become
significant.
Figure 2. Typical examples of RCS as a function of angle.

280 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 280 3/7/2014 2:51:01 PM

 3. RCS Measurements
As shown in Equation (1), the RCS of a target is defined
in the far field (i.e., under plane-wave illumination). RCS
measurements are performed outdoors and indoors. In both
outdoor and indoor measurements, the challenges are to isolate
the target from the environment, and to supply far-field condi-
tions. The performance of a test range can be characterized by
the following parameters:
• Isolation: The test environment should be as elec-
tronically quiet as necessary. In other words, free-
space conditions must be supplied.
• Quiet Zone: This is the maximum size of the target
that satisfies the far-field (plane-wave) conditions in
the measurement facility. It is the volume within the
room where target is to be located.
• Minimum detectable RCS: This is the detectable sig-
nature of the smallest target.
• Dynamic range: This is the ratio between the maxi-
mum transmitted power and the minimum receiver
power (noise floor).
• Frequency range: The range between the minimum
and maximum measurement frequencies (typically,
2 GH to 26 GHz is considered good enough).
• RCS accuracy: This is the difference between the
true and measured RCS values, and depends on the
total uncertainty.
3.1 Outdoor RCS Measurements
The outdoor range should be away from urban and indus-
trial areas, in a quiet region, and long enough so that the
spherical wave radiated by the transmitting antenna approxi-
mately becomes a plane wave. Figure 3 pictures a typical out-
door facility. A typical range criterion for a target with a longest
dimension D at a frequency f ( λ = 3 × 108 f in m) is given as
D2
Rmin = p . (3)
λ
Equation (3), with p = 2 , allows a maximum of 22.5° of phase
taper in the incident field. When applied to RCS measurements,
the relation allows a maximum two-way phase taper of 45°. This
criterion has historically been used as a general guideline for
RCS measurements. For a 1 m by 1 m target (i.e., D 2 = 1 m 2 ),
this criterion corresponds to 6 m, 60 m, and 120 m at 1 GHz,
10 GHz, and 18 GHz, respectively. Note that far-field definitions
may differ, depending on the definition based on EM radiation
around an antenna, the wavefront criterion, and inter-antenna
antenna coupling (the wavefront criterion is used in RCS
engineering).
IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013
AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 281
In Figure 3, the received signal consists of the combination
of four distinct components, traveling along paths ABA (direct –
direct), ABCA (direct – indirect), ACBA (indirect – direct), and
ACBCA (indirect – indirect), respectively. The first component
is the direct signal, the second and third components undergo a
single ground reflection, and the fourth component undergoes a
double reflection. If the antenna gains in the directions of points
B and C are identical (this is satisfied for outdoor ranges),
the four components have equal magnitudes. Because the
components add as field quantities, the effective RCS is given
by
σ 1/2 =σ 1/2
0 (
e jkS + 2 ρ e (
jk S + L )
+ ρ 2 e j 2kL , ) (4)
where S and L are the lengths of the shortest (i.e., direct) and
longest (i.e., indirect ground-reflected) paths, respectively, and
ρ is the ground-reflection coefficient. For smooth, level PEC
ground, ρ = ±1 for horizontal and vertical polarizations,
respectively. This equation can be written as
σ 1/2 =σ 01/2 e jkS 1 + 2 ρ e jk ( L − S ) + ρ 2 e j 2k ( L − S )  . (5)
 
For a PEC level ground with horizontal polarization (i.e.,
ρ = −1 ), it becomes
jk ( L − S )
+e (
jkS  j 2k L − S ) 
σ 1/2 = σ 1/2
0 e 1 − 2e 
. (6)
 
The bracketed term represents the magnitude-enhancement
factor or gain over the free-space field. It is maximum and
equals four for ( L − S ) =
m ( λ 2 ) , where m is an odd integer.
From geometric considerations, when m = 1 , Equation (6)
leads to the relationship
Rλ
H A HT = . (7)
4
Figure 3. An outdoor monostatic RCS measurement setup.
281
3/7/2014 2:51:01 PM
 In order to minimize ground effects, it was shown in [22] that
the target should be mounted as high as possible, while the
transmitting/receiving antenna should be as low as possible to
meet this condition. For a 1 km long outdoor test range and a
target height of HT = 25 m, the antenna height would be 0.3 m
at 10 GHz, but 10 m at 300 MHz.

The ground plane of the outdoor range, arranged to maxi-

mize the received signal at the operating frequency as given
in Equation (7), theoretically produces a 12 dB increase (two-
way path) in received signal over a free-space condition. This
is an attractive advantage, because it increases the achievable
sensitivity for a given transmitted power.

3.2 Indoor RCS Measurements

Figure 4. An indoor monostatic RCS measurement setup.
An indoor RCS range is an anechoic room that simulates
free-space and far-field conditions. Figure 4 describes a basic
configuration/test setup for RCS measurements with a vector
network analyzer, including coherent RF sources and multiple
receivers. This configuration is basically for monostatic RCS
measurements.

Every test range requires fully automated software to

operate the facility. Normally, the facility designer provides this
software, along with the other equipment. This software should
be capable of handling various vector network analyzers and
position controllers. With the help of this software, calibrations
are made, measurements are done, and post processing of data
is performed (if required). This software also includes some
data-visualization and report-generation features.

IEEE Standard 1502™-2007 (IEEE Recommended Prac-

tice for Radar Cross Section Test Procedures) [22] is the only
standard for RCS measurements. It explains RCS measure-
ment techniques, outdoor and indoor RCS facilities, necessary
instrumentation, imaging of objects, organizing and managing Figure 5. Different compact ranges mentioned in [22].
necessary documents, and uncertainty analysis to verify how
accurate the facility is.

Figure 5 shows four different compact ranges for indoor

RCS measurements, listed in [22]. Radar-absorbing materials
on the walls, ceiling and floor do the environmental isolation
and simulate free space. The far-field conditions are satisfied
with different reflectors and designs, where a spherical wave
emitted from the radar antenna is collimated into a planar wave
in a relatively short distance. The compact ranges in the figure
are (top left) a low-cost offset-fed; (top right) a Cassegrain
dual reflector with high cross-polarization isolation; (bottom
left) a relatively expensive Gregorian dual reflector with best
cross-polarization isolation; and (bottom right) a dual-cylinder
reflector type, which marginally improves polarization purity.
They all produce an approximation to a plane wave over the
quite or test zone. A photo of an example compact range (where
the measurements presented here were performed) is given in
Figure 6. Figure 6. A photo of a dual-reflector compact range.

282 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 282 3/7/2014 2:51:02 PM

 Limitations of compact ranges can result from surface
irregularities, wall reflections, reflector-edge diffractions,
feedback-lobe and feed-forward scattering. Range and cross-
range ambiguities in a compact range are other critical issues
[22]. These restrict the choice of the frequency step and the
angular step, respectively, during the RCS measurements.
Targets are either hung or located on top of a support
inside the compact range. Supports differ from target to target,
as well as from measurement to measurement. They range
from shaped pylons to foam columns with extremely low RCS
contributions. The goal of the support is to hold the target in a
way such that the target appears to be floating in free space. The
RCS contribution of any support should at least be 20 dB below
the lowest scatterer of interest.
Measurement results presented without their ranges of
uncertainties are meaningless in engineering [23]. Any meas-
urement of a physical property, such as σ (RCS), should be
quantified by a statement of uncertainty,
σ= σ 0 ± ∆σ , (8)
which indicates the best estimate, σ 0 , of the measurement, and
an uncertainty, ∆σ ≥ 0 , which is suggested as a reasonable
bound for the measurement error. Note that the error is the
difference between the measured and true values, but the
uncertainty is a bound on what the error might be. Uncertainty
estimation often identifies the principal sources of error that
should be controlled to improve measurement quality. Typical
RCS measurement uncertainty budgets are given in Tables 1
and 2 of [22]. Some of these uncertainty components are illu-
mination fluctuations, polarization mismatch, background-
target interactions, positioning, target orientation, drift, fre-
quency fluctuations, equipment nonlinearities, range, and ref-
erence RCS.
The types of measurements that can be conducted in a
compact range are as follows:
• RCS as a function of angle: This is the classical RCS
pattern measurement. Both horizontal and vertical
patterns can be measured. In order to do that, the
frequency should be set to a fixed value, or the
azimuth and/or elevation axes should be swept and
scanned.
Table 1. The RCS of standard objects.
Target Dimensions Max RCS
Sphere D: diameter
σ = π D2 4
Plate a, b: length, width
σ = 4π a 2b 2 λ 2
Cylinder r: radius, L: length
σ = 2 π rL2 λ
Dihedral Reflector a, b: length, width
σ = 8 π a 2b 2 λ 2
• RCS as a function of down range: By performing an
inverse Fourier or chirp-Z transform on “RCS as a
function of frequency” data, this can be obtained.
• RCS imaging: RCS imaging or inverse synthetic-
aperture radar (ISAR) imaging data can be gener-
ated by performing a two-dimensional (2D) Fourier
transform, using both RCS as a function of azimuth
angle and RCS as a function of frequency data sets.
One can then obtain a two-dimensional data set:
that is, RCS as a function of cross range and down
range. This resulting data set is termed an Image of
the Target, and can be compared with a perspective
optical view of the target.
4. Compact Range Calibration
A compact range is always calibrated before any RCS
measurements. Unwanted echoes (clutter and noise) inside
the compact range (see Figure 7) may be eliminated by “time
(range) gating.” Time gating may be used to eliminate unwanted
echoes from the walls, from target supports, unwanted leakage
from the transmitter, and some other unwanted signals, as long
as these signals can be separated in the time. If not, a technique
called “background subtraction” may be applied. This is a

• RCS as a function of frequency: At a fixed azimuth

and elevation position of the target, a frequency
scan is applied from a given minimum frequency to
a maximum value, with a desired frequency step.

• RCS as a function of cross range: By performing

a Fourier or chirp-Z transform on an “RCS as a
function of azimuth” measurement, the RCS as
a function of cross range data can be generated.
The cross-range coordinate is in units of distance,
measured laterally across the target on a horizontal
line that is perpendicular to the range axis. Figure 7. Target and unwanted echoes in a compact range.

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 283

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 283 3/7/2014 2:51:02 PM

 technique for reducing the effects of unwanted returns (called
background) not associated with the target. The background of
the compact range in the absence of target can be measured and
stored, and then coherently subtracted from the data recorded
with the target present. Note that this approach is only effective
for RCS measurements at long wavelengths, especially in the
VHF and UHF bands (roughly, between 50 MHz to 900 MHz).
Note that noise that is an uncorrelated signal may also be
eliminated by using coherent and non-coherent integration
techniques [24].
Figure 8 shows the time response of an empty compact
range, which was obtained via the inverse Fourier transform
of the empty-room scattering data. The time response of the
difference between a calibration target (here, a PEC sphere)
and the empty room’s response are also shown in Figure 8. In
this figure, mutual coupling from the antennas was observed
at about 2 m distance. Reflections from the subreflector, direct
path, reference sphere, and back wall are prominent. Only
reflection from the reference sphere was desired. As observed,
all these unwanted reflections were significantly eliminated
after the subtraction of the response of the empty room. This
time-domain response can be used for software gating in the
time domain, where we can only record the response of the
target.
Note that empty-room subtraction is valid for an indoor
chamber with the fundamental assumption that all of the back-
ground remains stationary, and thus can be eliminated. Inside
the chamber, every item is stationary except the target’s support
structure. In order to eliminate this, the empty-room response is
measured at every aspect angle by rotating the positioner, and
dynamic vector subtraction is applied. In the case of outdoor
measurements, background subtraction is valid up to the UHF
band. This background subtraction can further enhance the
minimum RCS detection up to 20 dB.
Figure 8. The measured time-domain response of the dual-
reflector compact range shown in Figure 6. Identified clut-
ter sources are also marked.
284
AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 284
5. Calibration Targets
Compact-range calibrations in RCS measurements use
targets with known RCS values. Usually, these are simple
objects with analytical RCS values. A few calibration targets
are listed in Table 1. Three planar calibration targets are given
in Figure 9, with their RCS formulae in the optical RCS regime.
The optical values shown in Figure 9, for a PEC plate, dihedral,
and trihedral, are for ( θ= 90° , ϕ= 90° ), ( θ= 90° , ϕ= 45° ),
and ( θ= 45° , ϕ= 45° ), respectively.
Figures 10-12 show some RCS examples obtained via
analytical and numerical models using these calibration tar-
gets. The monostatic, co-polarized RCS as a function of fre-
quency of a 10 cm x 10 cm PEC plate is given in Figure 10.
The Geometrical Optics (GO) curve in this figure belongs to the
formula given in Figure 9:
4π a 4
σ= . (9)
λ2
The other two curves belong to Finite-Difference Time-
Domain (FDTD) [14-17] and Method of Moments (MoM) [18]
simulations. The agreement among all three results is again
quite impressive. Note that the vertical dashed line at 12 GHz
shows the validity range of the FDTD and MoM simulations for
the specified discretization parameters.
Figure 11 presents the angular bistatic RCS patterns of the
same 10 cm x 10 cm PEC square plate at 6 GHz (this cor-
responds to l= a= 2λ ). The two plots in this figure belong to
FDTD and Physical Optics simulations. The Physical Optics
result was obtained from [8]:
2
4π a 4  sin 0.5ka ( sin θ s + sin θi ) cos ϕ  
σ= cos θ s  
2

λ2  0.5ka ( sin θ s + sin θi ) cos ϕ  
2
 sin 0.5ka ( sin θ s + sin θi ) sin ϕ  
  .
 0.5ka ( sin θ s + sin θi ) sin ϕ  
(10)
The agreement among the results is impressive. The Physical
Optics model used surface currents on the illuminated side only,
and could not take full diffraction into account. Discrepancies
observed between Physical Optics and FDTD were therefore
as expected.
A plot of the monostatic, co-polarized RCS as a function
of frequency for the same size of PEC trihedral is given in
Figure 12. Figure 10 shows that the simple Geometrical Optics
formula of the PEC plate can be used to estimate the order of
the RCS value if the target under investigation has a dominant
reflecting plane across the radar. On the other hand, the Geo-
metrical Optics formula of the trihedral (in Figure 12) seems
to be optimistic by 3 to 5 dB [16]. Note that the RCS fluctua-
tions at low frequencies were because of the target-EM wave
interaction as a whole.
IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013
3/7/2014 2:51:02 PM
 Figure 10. A plot of the monostatic, co-polarized RCS as a
function of frequency of a 10 cm x 10 cm PEC rectangular
plate. The angles of illumination and scatter were
θ=i θ s= 90° , ϕi = ϕ s = 0° ( σ θθ case).

Figure 11. The bistatic RCS as a function of angle of a 10 cm

x 10 cm PEC square plate at 6 GHz ( l = 2λ ). The plots are
normalized (i.e., 30 dB corresponds to -3 dB ( θ= i 90° ,
ϕ=i 90 ° , θ =
s 90 ° , 0 ° ≤ ϕ s ≤ 360° , horizontal scan, σ θθ
Figure 9. Planar calibration (test) targets.
case).

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 285

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 285 3/7/2014 2:51:03 PM

 Figure 13 shows the monostatic RCS as a function of the
aspect angle of a 10 cm PEC square trihedral. Here, measure-
ment results were compared with the MoM-based simulation
results.

The most important calibration RCS target is a PEC

sphere (see Figure 14 for a few calibration spheres with differ-
ent diameters). It is completely symmetric scatterer, and
polarization free. Its RCS in the far-field region is given by [25]

2
λ2 ∞
( −1)n ( 2n + 1)
σ= ∑ ˆ ( 2) , (11)
4π n =1 H n′ ( ka ) Hˆ n( 2) ( ka )
Figure 12. The monostatic, co-polarized RCS as a function
where Hˆ n( ) ( kr ) is the spherical Hankel function, which can be
2
of frequency plot of a 10 cm x 10 cm PEC trihedral
expressed in terms of regular Hankel functions via ( θ=
i 45°  , ϕ=
i 45° , σ θθ case).

π ka ( 2 )
Hˆ n( ) ( ka ) =
2
H ( ka ) . (12)
2 n +1/2

Hˆ n′( ) ( kr ) is the partial derivative of the spherical Hankel

2

function with respect to kr . Table 2 lists a short MATLAB script

that calculates the monostatic RCS of a PEC sphere using
Equations (11)-(12).

Figure 15 presents the RCS as a function of frequency of

a 5.08 cm PEC sphere. The optical value ( π D 2 4 ) of this
sphere was nearly −29 dBsm. The solid line in the figure
belongs to the Mie model, and was obtained using the code in
Table 2. Finally, the dashed line belongs to the 2-18 GHz
compact-range measurements. Discrepancies between meas-
ured and analytic exact data were because of difficulties in
measurements at the low- and high-frequency ends of the
compact range (i.e., this range was for the 2-18 GHz band).
Figure 13. The monostatic RCS as a function of aspect angle
After all calibrations, a typical RCS measurement was of a PEC square (10 cm) trihedral: solid line, measurement;
done with the target shown in Figure 16. The same target was dashed line, MoM. The dashed line in the figure inset shows
also numerically constructed using MATLAB, and its RCS the angular scan.
was predicted via the commercial package CST [26] (Table 3
lists a short MATLAB code for the generation of this target).
In Figure 17, the location, orientation, and size of the target is
given. The RCS as a function of the aspect angle of this target
is plotted in Figure 18. As was observed, very good agreement
was obtained between measurement and simulations. Note
that the measurement presented in Figure 18 took less than an
hour. On the other hand, the CST simulations using its integral
solvers module (with an i3 processor) took more than six hours
to produce the same results.

There are a few important, practical considerations that the

RCS engineer should keep in mind, starting from calibration to
the final reporting and documentation:

• During the calibration and actual measurements,

none of the RF paths, RF equipment, support posi- Figure 14. A photo of standard calibration PEC spheres.

286 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 286 3/7/2014 2:51:03 PM

 Table 2. A short MATLAB script for the RCS as a function of frequency of a
PEC sphere using the Mie series model.
function [Freq RCSdB] =SphereRCS(Dia,Freq1, Freq2,N)
%---------------------------------------------------
% Program: SphereRCS.m
% Purpose: To calculation of RCS of PEC sphere
% using Mie Technique
% Usage: SphereRCS(Dia,Freq1, Freq2,N)
% Freq1, Freq2: Start and Stop Freqs in Hz
% N: Number of frequency points (integer)
% OUTPUT: RCS vs. Frequency
% Example: SphereRCS(0.05,.2e7, 25e9,500) calculates
% RCS of a 5cm- sphere between 100 MHz and 25 GHz
% at 500 points
%---------------------------------------------------
c = 2.997925e008 ; % speed of light {m/sec}.
r = Dia / 2; % calculate sphere radius {m}.
iterations = 100 ; % number of Mie series terms.
freq_steps = N;
for k = 0 : freq_steps ;
Freq=Freq1+(k/(freq_steps+eps)*(Freq2-Freq1)) ;
Frequency(k+1)=Freq;
lambda=c/(Freq); ka=2*pi*r/lambda;
s=sqrt(pi/2/ka); n=1:iterations;
[B1(n),ierr(1,n)]=besselj(n+1/2,ka);
[B2(n),ierr(2,n)]=besselh(n+1/2,2,ka);
[B3(n),ierr(3,n)]=besselj(n+1/2-1,ka);
[B4(n),ierr(4,n)]=besselh(n+1/2-1,2,ka);
if any(any(ierr))
disp(‘Warning: Accuracy error in Bessel func’)
end
a(n)=(s*B1)./(s*B2);
b(n)=(ka*s*B3-n.*s.*B1)./(ka*s*B4-n.*s.*B2);
RCS(k+1)=(lambda^2/pi)*(abs(sum((-1).^n.*(n+1/2).*
(b(n)-a(n)))))^2;
% -------- Optical RCS Value -------------
Aeff=Dia*lambda/4;
RCSan(k+1)=10*log10(4*pi*Aeff^2/lambda^2);
% ----------------------------------------
end
RCSdB=10*log10(RCS); Freq=Frequency/1e9;
% ------------ SAVE DATA -------------------
out(:,1)=Freq; out(:,2)=RCSdB; out(:,3)=RCSan;
save(‘MieRCS.dat’, ‘out’,’-ascii’,’-tabs’)
% ------------ PLOT DATA ------------------
plot(Freq,RCSdB,’r’, ‘LineWidth’,2); hold on;
plot(Freq,RCSan,’k--’, ‘LineWidth’,2);
title (‘RCS vs. Frequency’); axis([0 25 -35 -20])
xlabel (‘Frequency [GHz]’); ylabel (‘RCS [dBsm]’);
legend(‘Mie Series’,’Optical’)
%---------------- END -----------------------

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 287

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 287 3/7/2014 2:51:04 PM

 Figure 15. Triple comparisons of the monostatic RCS as a
function of frequency of a 5.08 cm PEC sphere.

Figure 16. A typical target: (top) its photo; (bottom) its

three-dimensional MATLAB picture.

Figure 17. The location, orientation, and coordinates of the

test target given in Figure 16.

Figure 18. The monostatic RCS as a function of angle of the test target given in Figure 16.

288 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 288 3/7/2014 2:51:04 PM

 Table 3. A short MATLAB script for the generation of the target in Figure 16.
% --------------------------------------------
% contruct and plot the target in Fig. 16
% --------------------------------------------
clear all, close all, clc
f=’R*sin(TH)*0’; g=’R*sin(TH)’; h=’R*cos(TH)’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1; th=-pi/2:0.01:pi/2;
[R,TH]=meshgrid(r,th);
X = eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z); shading interp; hold on
f=’R*sin(TH)’; g=’R*sin(TH)*0’; h=’R*cos(TH)’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1; th=-pi/2:0.01:pi/2;
[R,TH] = meshgrid(r,th);
X = eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z);shading interp; hold on
f=’R*cos(TH)’; g=’R*sin(TH)’; h=’R*cos(TH)*0’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1; th=-pi:0.01:pi;
[R,TH] = meshgrid(r,th);
X = eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z);shading interp; hold on
f=’R*sin(TH)*cos(pi/4)’; g=’R*sin(TH)*sin(pi/4)’;
h=’R*cos(TH)’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1/3; th=-pi/2:0.01:pi/2;
[R,TH]=meshgrid(r,th);
X = eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z+1.1); shading interp; hold on
f=’R*sin(TH)*cos(3*pi/4)’;g=’R*sin(TH)*sin(3*pi/4)’ ;
h=’R*cos(TH)’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1/3; th=-pi/2:0.01:pi/2;
[R,TH]=meshgrid(r,th);
X = eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z+1.1); shading interp; hold on
f=’R*cos(TH)’; g=’R*sin(TH)’; h=’R*cos(TH)*0’ ;
F=vectorize(f); G=vectorize(g); H=vectorize(h);
r=0:0.01:1/3; th=-pi:0.01:pi;
[R,TH] = meshgrid(r,th);
X=eval(F); Y = eval(G); Z = eval(H);
surf(X,Y,Z+1.1);shading interp; hold on
x=-0.05:0.01:0.05; z=0.9:0.01:1.1;
[X,Z] = meshgrid(x,z);
surf(-0.33*ones(size(X)),X,Z);shading interp
hold on
x=-0.05:0.01:0.05; z=0.9:0.01:1.1;
[X,Z] = meshgrid(x,z);
surf(0.33*ones(size(X)),X,Z);shading interp
hold on
x=-0.05:0.01:0.05; z=0.9:0.01:1.1;
[X,Z] = meshgrid(x,z);
surf(X,-0.33*ones(size(X)),Z);shading interp
hold on
x=-0.05:0.01:0.05; z=0.9:0.01:1.1;
[X,Z] = meshgrid(x,z);
surf(X,0.33*ones(size(X)),Z);shading interp
hold on; axis off
% ----------------- END -------------------------
IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 289

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 289 3/7/2014 2:51:04 PM

 Table 4. A comparison of three RCS facilities.

Outdoor Near-Field
Range Type Property Compact Range
Range Range
Lowest Frequency UHF band 2 GHz 1 GHz
Highest Frequency Ku Band 67-110 GHZ 67-110 GHz
Quite Zone Size Very Large Reflector size dependant Size dependant
Quite Zone Quality Moderate Very good Very good
High Power Yes No No
Scale-Down Requirement No Yes Maybe
Environmental Effects High No No
Cost Very High High Moderate

tions, and or any of the other configurations should
be changed, and no new equipment should be
inserted or incorporated. Otherwise, the calibration
becomes invalid.
• Alignment of the calibration target is required if
other than a sphere is used for calibration. This can
be done by using old calibration results for RCS data
as a function of angle. Here, data can be recorded
with narrow angular steps and the maximum value
can be found. The positioned target can then be set
to this maximum angle, and the current system can
be calibrated.
• Before the measurements, placement and alignment
of the target is necessary. In order to do that, a
calibration target may be used.
2. D. K. Barton, Modern Radar System Analysis, Norwood,
MA, Artech House, 1988.
3. F. E. Nathanson, Radar Design Principles, Second Edition,
New York, McGraw Hill, 1991.
4. J. L. Eaves and E. K. Reedy (eds.), Principles of Modern
Radar, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987.
5. H. D. Meikle, Modern Radar Systems, Norwood, MA, Artech
House, 2001.
6. E. Brookner, Aspects of Modern Radar, Norwood, MA,
Artech House, 1998.
7. S. Kingsley and S. Quegan, Understanding Radar Systems,
London, McGraw Hill, 1992.

8. U. F. Knott, Radar Cross Section Measurements, New York,

6. Conclusions Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993.

9. J. F. Shaeffer, M. T. Tuley, and E. F. Knot, Radar Cross

Indoor radar cross section (RCS) measurements have
Section, Norwood, MA, Artech House, 1985.
been reviewed. Typical compact ranges and their calibrations
were presented. Calibration and test targets were discussed.
10. C. Jenn, Radar and Laser Cross Section Engineering, AIAA
Analytical and numerical RCS predictions, as well as RCS
Education Series, 1995.
measurements, were given.
11. L. Sevgi, Complex Electromagnetic Problems and
RCS measurements can be performed in three different
Numerical Simulation Approaches, Piscataway, NJ, IEEE
environments: outdoor RCS range, indoor compact range, and
Press/Wiley, 2003.
indoor near-field range. The advantages and disadvantages of
these three were listed in Table 4. Near-field RCS measure-
12. R. L Cosgriff, W. H Peake, and R. C. Taylor “Terrain
ments will be reviewed in one of the future tutorials.
Scattering Properties for Sensor System Design,” (Terrain
Handbook II), Engineering Experiment Station Bulletin, 29, 3,
The Ohio State University Columbus , OH, May 1960.
7. References
13. Goodyear Aircraft Corporation, “Radar Terrain Return
1. M. I. Skolnik, Introduction to Radar Systems, New York, Study, Final Report: Measurement of Back-Scattering Coeffi-
McGraw Hill, NY, 1985. cients with an Airborne X-Band Radar,” September 1959.

290 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd 290 3/7/2014 2:51:04 PM

 14. L. Sevgi and S. Paker, “FDTD Based RCS Calculations and
Antenna Simulations,” AEU, International J. of Electronics
and Communication, 52, 2, March 1988, pp. 65-75.

15. L. Sevgi, “Target Reflectivity and RCS Interaction in Inte-

grated Maritime Surveillance Systems Based on Surface Wave
HF Radar Radars,” IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine,
43, 1, February 2001, pp. 36-51.

16. Ç. Uluışık, G. Çakır, M. Çakır, and L. Sevgi, “Radar Cross

Section (RCS) Modeling and Simulation: Part I – Definitions,
Strategies, and Canonical Examples,” IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Magazine, 50, 1, February 2008, pp. 115-126.

17. G. Çakır, M. Çakır, and L. Sevgi, “Radar Cross Section

(RCS) Modeling and Simulation: Part II – A Novel FDTD-
Based RCS Prediction Virtual Tool,” IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Magazine, 50, 2, April 2008, pp. 81-94.

18. G. Toroglu, A. Uslu, and L. Sevgi, “RCS2D: A 2D MoM

and FDTD Based Simulator,” RFMiCAE, International Jour-
nal on RF and Microwave Computer-Aided Engineering, 23, 4,
July 2013, pp. 437-443.

19. P. Blacksmith Jr. , R. E Hiatt, and R. B Meek, “Introduc-

tion to Radar Cross Section Measurement,” Proceedings of the
IEEE, 53, August 1965, pp. 902-903.

20. N. C. Currie, Radar Reflectivity Measurement: Techniques

and Applications, Norwood, MA, Artech House,1989.

21. Agilent, “Agilent Radar Measurements,” Application Note

5989-7575EN.

22. IEEE Standard (Std 1502-2007), “IEEE Recommended

Practice for Radar Cross-Section Test Procedures,” 2007.

23. L. Sevgi, “Innumeracy: The Meaning of the Numbers We

Use,” IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, 49, 2, April
2007, pp. 195-190.

24. L. Sevgi, “Synthetic Radar Signal Environment: Computer

Generation of Signal, Noise, and Clutter,” IEEE Antennas and
Propagation Magazine, 49, 5, October 2007, pp. 192-198.

25. C. A. Balanis, Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics,

Second Edition, New York, John Wiley, 2012, Section 11.8.1.

26. CST, http://www.cst.com.

IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine, Vol. 55, No. 6, December 2013 291

AP_Mag_Dec_2013_Final.indd
View publication stats 291 3/7/2014 2:51:04 PM