Dot 2665 DS1

654 100-9-F
CHARACTERIZATION AND EVALUATION OF A PROTOTYPE

FORWARD-LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR (FLAR)
FINAL REPORT
SEPTEMBER 1997
R.K. Gilbert
P.K. Zoratti
R. Becker
G. Brumbaugh
T. Chaplin
M. Harrison
M. Hawks
K. Gondoly
Prepared for:
National Highway Traffic
Traffic Safety Administration
Office of Crash Avoidance Research
NRD-5 1, Room 6220
400 Seventh Street S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
Contract Number: DTNH22-94-Y-17016
~
ERIM
;To/mational, Inc. P.0. Box 134008 Ann Arbor, MI 48113-4008 313-994-1200 .
http://www.erim-int.com
ERIM-320
Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. searching existing data sources,
gathenng and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regardmg this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
Icollection of information. including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services. Directorate for Information. Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson
IDavis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188). Washington, DC 20503.
I I
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
March 1997 Final, from 1 March 1994 through 28 February 1997
4. TITLE AND SUBTlTLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS
Characterization and Evaluation of a Prototype Forward-Looking Automotive Radar
Final Report DTNH22-94-Y- 17016
6. AUTHOR(S)
R.K. Gilbert, P.K. Zoratti, R. Becker, G. Brumbaugh, T. Chaplin, M. Harrison,

M. Hawks, and K. Gondoly
7. PERFORMING ORGANlZATlON NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER
Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (ERIM) 654100-9-F

P.O. Box 134001
Ann Arbor, MI 48 113-4001
!3. SPONSORlNG/MONlTORlNG AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY

REPORT NUMBER
lNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
IOffice of Crash Avoidance Research
lNRD-51 , Room 6220
'400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20590
t 1. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
12a. DlSTRlBUTlON/AVAlLABlLlTY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE
Limited Distribution
13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 2 0 0 words)
This is the final report for a three-year Discretionary Cooperative Agreement with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA Grant DTNH22-94-Y-17016), “Characterization and Evaluation of a Forward-Looking automotive
Radar Sensor.” The Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (ERIM) and TRW were the industrial partners in this
ICooperative Agreement. The goal of this research program was to increase the knowledge and understanding of radar sensing
Jin the roadway environment by conducting structured testing of TRW’s prototype automotive radar sensor, or FLAR, in real-
world freeway settings. To achieve this goal, the following program objectives were established:
l to fully characterize TRW’s FLAR in a controlled laboratory setting
l to measure radar cross-sections of representative automobiles and roadway objects
l to measure the performance of the FLAR in a variety of freeway settings
l to provide data to TRW for refining its prototype sensor design
l to begin developing methodologies to test, evaluate, and certify sensors for collision avoidance system
14. SUBJECT ITEMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

Automotive Radar Sensor, FLAR, Collision Avoidance System
16. PRICE CODE
17. SECURITY CLASSlFlCATION 18. SECURlTY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Same as report
NSN 7540-01-280-5500
---
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-92)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18
298-102
CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Y ....................................................................... . . . .....................................l-l
1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF VEHICLES AND ROADWAY OBJECTS ................................l-l
1.2 ROADWAY TESTS .................................................................................................................. l-2
1.3 TESTING, EVALUATION AND CERTIFYING METHODOLOGIES ..................................l-3
1.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND SUGGESTED FUTURE EFFORTS .................................l-4
2.0 INTRODUCTION.. ............................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 TRW FORWARD-LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR (FLAR)..........................................2-l
2.2 MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................ .2- 1
2.3 RADAR CROSS-SECTION ...................................................................................................... 2-2
2.4 ROADWAY TESTS .................................................................................................................. 2-2
2.5 SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 2-2
3.0 MEASUREMENT OF TARGET CHARACTERISTICS/SIGNATURES ........................................3- 1
3.1 INTRODUCTION.. .................................................................................................................... 3-l
3.2 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................... 3-l
3.3 RADAR MEASUREMENTS .................................................................................................... 3-2
3.3.1 Experimental Setup ......................................................................................................... 3-3
3.3.2 Data Collection.. .............................................................................................................. 3-4
3.4 DATA PROCESSING.. .............................................................................................................. 3-4
3.5 DATA OUTPUT PRODUCTS AND INTERPRETATION.. ....................................................3-5
3.5.1 Maximum Return Level Versus Aspect Angle (Aspect Profile) Plot.............................3-5
3.5.2 Return Level Versus Range Plot (Range Profile) for a Given Aspect Angle.................3-6
3.5.3 Two-Dimensional Image “Movie”. ................................................................................. 3-7
3.5.4 Two-Dimensional Image-Single Aspect Angle ...........................................................3-8
3.5.5 Two-Dimensional Image-Integrated from Multiple Aspect Angles ............................3-9
3.6 INITIAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS.. ........................................................... .3-10
4.0 TRW FORWARD LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR (FLAR). ..................................................4- 1
4.1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 4-l
4.2 SENSOR CONFIGURATION.. ................................................................................................. 4- 1
4.3 SENSOR OPERATION ............................................................................................................. 4-2
4.3.1 General Overview ........................................................................................................... 4-2
4.3.2 Timing Specifications ..................................................................................................... 4-3
4.3.3 Automatic Gain Control (AGC) Amplifier.. .................................................................. -4-4
4.3.4 Transmitted Waveform .................................................................................................. 4-4
4.3.5 Intermediate Frequency Signal ...................................................................................... 4-6
4.3.6 Power Measurements ..................................................................................................... 4-6
4.3.7 Antenna Beam Patterns................................................................................................... 4-7
4.3.8 Beam Switch Isolation ................................................................................................... .4-7
4.4 BASELINE PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................4-7
4.4.1 Radar Field-of-View ................................................................. ..................................... 4-7
4.4.2 Range Accuracy .............................................................................................................. 4-8
4.4.3 Range Resolution .......................................................................................................... 4-14
4.4.4 Baseline IF Signal Characteristics ................................................................................ 4-18
111
CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
5.0 MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5- 1
5.1 MATERIALS TESTING.. .......................................................................................................... 5- 1
5.1.1 Results.. ........................................................................................................................... 5-l
5.1.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2 PRECIPITATION TESTS.. ........................................................................................................ 5-5
5.2.1 Results ............................................................................................................................. 5-5
5.2.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 5-6
5.3 CONTAMINATION TESTS ..................................................................................................... 5-7
5.3.1 Results ............................................................................................................................. 5-8
5.3.2 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 5-9
6.0 ROADWAY TESTS.. ......................................................................................................................... 6-l
6.1 BACKGROUND MEASUREMENTS ...................................................................................... 6-l
6.2 TEMPORAL CHANGES........................................................................................................... 6-2
6.3 RANGE CLUTTER ................................................................................................................... 6-3
6.4 AZIMUTH CLUTTER.. ............................................................................................................ .6-4
6.5 ROADWAY GEOMETRY ........................................................................................................ 6-5
7.0 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................... ..7-1
7.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF VEHICLES AND ROADWAY OBJECTS ............................... .7-l
7.2 ROADWAY TESTS ................................................................................................................. .7-2
7.3 TESTING, EVALUATION AND CERTIFYING METHODOLOGIES ................................. .7-5
7.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS ..................................................................................................... 7-6
APPENDIX A. RADAR SYSTEM MODEL .......................................................................................... A- 1
APPENDIX B . MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA.. ........................................................B- 1
APPENDIX C. ERIM TESTBED VEHICLE AND DATAANALYSIS SYSTEM .............................. C-l
APPENDIX D. DIFFERENTIAL GPS TRUTHING .............................................................................. D-l
APPENDIX E. EVALUATION OF SENSOR-ROADWAY DYNAMICS TEST PLAN ...................... E-l
APPENDIX F. TEST-TRACK RESULTS.. ............................................................................................. F- 1
APPENDIX G. OPEN ROADWAY TESTS ........................................................................................... G-l
iv
FIGURES
Figure 3- 1 Data Collection Set-up.. ................................................................. ........................................3-3
Figure 3-2. Example of Aspect Profile Plot ............................................................................................. 3-6
Figure 3-3. Example of Range Profile Plot .............................................................................................. 3-7
Figure 3-4. Examples of Single Aspect Angle Images ............................................................................ 3-9
Figure 3-5. Example of Noncoherently Integrated Radar Image.. .........................................................3-10
Figure 4-l. TRW’s AICC-3B FLAR.. ...................................................................................................... 4-2
Figure 4-2. FLAR Transmit Pulse Timing .............................................................................................. 4-4
Figure 4-3. AGC Attenuation (dB) Versus Voltage (Volts) ...................................................................4-4
Figure 4-4. Graphical Representations of a Chirp Waveform ................................................................. 4-5
Figure 4-5. Range in Proportion to IF Frequency .................................................................................... 4-5
Figure 4-6. FLAR Beam Patterns............................................................................................................. 4-7
Figure 4-8. Comer Reflector Range Test Results ................................................................................... .4-9
Figure 4-9. Effect of Chirp Rate Error................................................................................................... 4-10
Figure 4-10. Corrected Comer Reflector Range Test Results ............................................................... 4-l 1
4-13
Figure 4-l 1. 10 dBsm.. ...........................................................................................................................
Figure 4-12. 10 dBsm at 1 Meter ........................................................................................................... 4-13
Figure 4-13. FLAR Frequency Response to Comer at 1 Meter.. ..........................................................4-14
Figure 4- 14. Effect of Limited Resolution ............................................................................................ .4- 15
Figure 4-15. Performance With a Single 10 dBsm Target.. .................................................................. .4-16
Figure 4-16. Effects of Sinusoidal Phase Error.. ................................................................................... .4-17
5-2
Figure 5- 1 . Attenuation Levels.. ...............................................................................................................
Figure 5-2. Multipath Reflection.. ............................................................................................................ 5-3
Figure 5-3. Multipath Returns From TPO Material at 15 Degree Incident Angle...................................5-4
Figure 5-4. Precipitation Attenuation Levels ........................................................................................... 5-6
Figure 5-5. Contamination Attenuation Levels........................................................................................ 5-8
Figure A- 1. Radar as Part of a Collision Warning System ..................................................................... A-2
Figure A-2. A Generic Radar .................................................................................................................. A-3
Figure A-3. Radar Energy Reflection and Refraction.. ........................................................................... A-4
Figure A-4. Radar Returns and Orientation ............................................................................................ A-4
Figure A-5. Radar Cross Section Illustrated ........................................................................................... A-5
Figure A-6. Time and Frequency of a Chirp Waveform......................................................................... A-5
Figure A-7. Determining Time Delay ..................................................................................................... A-6
B-l
Figure B-l. Baseline Test ........................................................................................................................
Figure B-2. Glass (15 degree angle). ....................................................................................................... B-2
Figure B-3. Attenuation Levels............................................................................................................... B-3
Figure B-4. Multipath Reflection ............................................................................................................ B-4
Figure B-5. Multipath Returns From TPO Material at 16 Degree Incident Angle.. ............................... B-4
V
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Figure B-6. Reflection From Conductive Surface ............................................ ......................................B-5
Figure B-7. Reflection From Non-Conductive Surface .......................................................................... B-5
Figure B-8. Reflection and Refraction Angles........................................................................................ B-5
Figure B-9. Object Orientation Effect on Reflected Signal ....................................................................B-6
Figure B- 10. Two-Way Power Attenuation (dB/l0 m) ......................................................................... B- 16
Figure B-l 1. Two-Way Power Attenuation (dB) .................................................................................. B-30
Figure B-l 2. Potential Cause for Contaminated Target Increased RCS ...............................................B-3 1
Figure C-l . Testbed Vehicle and Instrumentation Rack.........................................................................C-2
Figure C-2. Data Collection System Instrumentation Block Diagram ...................................................C-2
C-5
Figure C-3. The DGPS System ...............................................................................................................
Figure C-4. Collection Software Flow Diagram..................................................................................... C-6
c-7
Figure C-5. Data Analysis Concept.........................................................................................................
Figure C-6. Averaging six Radar Returns ............................................................................................... C-8
c-10
Figure C-7. Matlab Processed Data .......................................................................................................
C-10
Figure C-8. Matlab Processed Data.. ......................................................................................................
c-11
Figure C-9. Matlab Processed Data.......................................................................................................
C-l 1
Figure C-l 0. Matlab Processed Data.....................................................................................................
Figure C-l 1. ‘Data Processed Using FLARPP Software .......................................................................C-l 1
Figure D-l. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Position.. .......................................................................... D-5
Figure D-2. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Velocity ........................................................................... D-5
Figure D-3. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Position, Expanded Time Scale.. .....................................D-6
Figure D-4. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Velocity, Expanded Time Scale.. ....................................D-6
Figure D-5. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, Up Position.. ............................................................................ D-7
Figure D-6. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, Up Velocity ............................................................................. D-7
Figure D-7. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change, North Position ................................................................. D-8
Figure D-8. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change, North Velocity ................................................................D-8
Figure D-9. Run 3, Eastbound lane Change, North Position, Expanded Time Scale .............................D-8
Figure D-l 0. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change, North Velocity, Expanded Time Scale .........................D-8
Figure D-l 1. Run 6, East-to-North Turn, East Position.. ........................................................................ D-9
Figure D- 12. Run 6, East-to-North Turn, North Position ....................................................................... D-9
Figure D-l 3. Run 6, East-to-North Turn, East Velocity ......................................................................... D-9
Figure D-14. Run 6, East-to-North Velocity ....................................................... ....................................D-9
Figure D-15. Dual and Single Frequency Carrier Integrated Phase DGPS Initial Response.. ............. D-10
Figure F- 1. FLAR Response to Roadside Vehicle Clutter.. ..................................................................... F-2
Figure F-2. Object Orientation Roadside Clutter Analysis.. .................................................................... F-2
Figure F-3. FLAR Center Beam Pattern .................................................................................................. F-3
Figure F-4. FLAR Response to Vehicle in Adjacent Lane ...................................................................... F-4
vi
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Figure F-5. Object Orientation Adjacent Lane Clutter Analysis .................... ....................................... F-5
Figure F-6. FLAR Measured Beam Patterns............................................................................................ F-5
Figure F-7. How Target Orientation Affects Return Levels .................................................................... F-6
Figure F-8. Braking Secondary Vehicle................................................................................................... F-7
Figure F-9. Peak Return Levels.. ..............................................................................................................
F-8
Figure F-10. GPS Truth for R9. ..............................................................................................................
F-9
Figure F- 11. Gut of Lane Vehicle Clutter--Straight ............................................................................. F- 10
Figure F- 12. Host Vehicle Lane Changes .............................................................................................. F- 13
Figure F-13. GPS Tmth for R9.. .............................................................................................................
F-l3
Figure F-14. Tracking New Secondary Vehicle-Straight Roadway.................................................... F-15
Figure F-15. GPS Truth for R14.............................................................................................................
F-16
Figure F-16. Tracking With a Cut-In Straight Roadway ....................................................................... F-17
Figure F-17. GPS Truth for R17.. ...........................................................................................................
F-18
Figure F- 18. Beam Illumination.............................................................................................................
F-l 8
Figure F- 19. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range ....................................................................................... F-20
Figure F-20. GPS Truth for R18.. ...........................................................................................................
F-20
Figure F-2 1. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range ....................................................................................... F-21
Figure F-22. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range ....................................................................................... F-22
Figure F-23. GPS Truth for R18 .............................................................................................................
F-23
Figure F-24. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range ....................................................................................... F-23
Figure F-25. Vehicle Clutter in Azimuth ............................................................................................... F-26
Figure F-26. Out of Lane Vehicle Clutter-Straight ............................................................................. F-27
Figure F-27. Sequence of Guard Rail Returns ....................................................................................... F-28
Figure F-28. Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved Road ................................................................. F-29
Figure F-29. Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved Road ................................................................. F-29
Figure F-30. Adjacent Lane Vehicle on Curve ...................................................................................... F-3 1
Figure F-3 1. Tracking Through A Curve ............................................................................................... F-33
Figure F-32. Tracking Through A Curve ............................................................................................... F-33
Figure F-33. GPS Truth for R30r, R31r, and R32 ................................................................................ F-35
Figure F-34. Illumination of Targets on Curved Roadways .................................................................. F-37
Figure F-35. Vehicle Clutter on Curved Roadway Scenario.................................................................. F-38
Figure F-36. Radar Data Curved-Roadway ......................................................................................... F-39
Figure F-37. GPS Truth for R28.............................................................................................................
F-40
Figure F-38. Center Beam Patterns ........................................................................................................
F-41
Figure F-39. Short Range Illumination .................................................................................................. F-42
Figure F-40. GPS Truth for R28. ...........................................................................................................
F-42
Figure F-41. Medium Range Illumination ............................................................................................. F-43
vii
.
FIGURES (CONTINUED)
Figure G- 1. Overpass Illumination-0o Offset................................................ . .....................................G-2
o
Figure G-2. Overpass Illumination-l Offset....................................................................................... G-2
Figure G-3. Overpass Returns--1o Offset .............................................................................................. G-3
Figure G-4. 2 Degree Offset Data ........................................................................................................... G-3
Figure G-S. Returns From Various Road Surfaces ................................................................................. G-6
Figure G-9. Returns on Curved Roadway ............................................................................................... G-7
Figure G-10. FOV and Occlusion Limitations ........................................................................................ G-8
Figure G-l 1. Collection in Heavy Traffic ............................................................................................... G-9
Figure G- 12. Returns From On-Coming Traffic ................................................................................... G-10
Figure G- 13. Returns From Car Carrier Vehicle................................................................................... G- 11
viii
. .. ,
-:;;I-
TABLES
Table 3- 1. Radar Parameters ............................................................................. . ...................................... 3-4
Table 3-2. Characteristic RCS Fall-Off.. ................................................................................................ 3-l 1
Table 4-l . FLAR Timing Parameters.. .................................................................................................... .4-3
Table 4-2. Transmit Waveform Parameters ............................................................................................ -4-6
Table 4-3. IF Signal Parameters............................................................................................................... 4-6
Table 4-4. Beam Switch Isolation............................................................................................................ 4-7
Table 5- 1 Attenuation.............................................................................................................................. 5-2
Table 5-2. Precipitation Test Results ....................................................................................................... 5-6
Table 5-3. Contamination Test Summary ........................................................................ ..................... 5-8
Table 6-l. Background Measurements Results and Key Observations ...................................................6-2
Table 6-2. Temporal Change Measurements Results and Key Observations.. ........................................6-3
Table 6-3. Range Clutter Measurements Results and Key Observations ...............................................6-4
Table 6-4. Azimuth Clutter Measurements Results and Key Observations.. ...........................................6-5
Table 6-5. Roadway Geometry Measurements Results and Key Observations .......................................6-6
Table A- 1. Generic Radar Components .................................................................................................. A-3
Table B- 1 Attenuation ............................................................................................................................ B-3
Table B-2. Precipitation Measurement.. ................................................................................................ B- 16
Table B-3. Contamination Measurement .............................................................................................. B-30
Table D- 1. FCW System Performance Requirements ............................................................................ D-2
Table D-2. MMS Inertial Sensor Error Specifications.. .......................................................................... D-3
Table F- 1 RCS Analysis Results ........................................................................................................... F-21
Table F-2. Return Levels of Stationary Clutter.. .................................................................................... F-30
Table F-3. Angular Departure for 238 Meter Radius Curve.. ................................................................ F-34
Table F-4. RCS Numerical Analysis...................................................................................................... F-36
Table F-5. Curved Roadway Test Analysis Summary ........................................................................... F-40
Table F-6. Vehicle Location Versus Range to Vehicle.. ........................................................................ F-41
Table G-l. Overpass RCS ....................................................................................................................... G-6
ix
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document is the final report for a three-year Discretionary Cooperative Agreement with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA Grant DTNH22-94-Y-17016),
“Characterization and Evaluation of a Forward-Looking Automotive Radar Sensor.” The goal of this
research program was to increase the knowledge and understanding of radar sensing in the roadway
environment by conducting structured testing of TRW’s prototype forward-looking automotive radar
sensor, or FLAR, in real-world freeway settings. To achieve this goal, the following program objectives
were established:
. to fully characterize TRW’s FLAR in a controlled laboratory setting,
l to measure radar cross-sections of representative automobiles and roadway objects,
. to measure the performance of the FLAR in a variety of freeway settings,
l to provide data to TRW for refining its prototype sensor design, and
l to begin developing methodologies to test, evaluate, and certify sensors for collision avoidance
systems.
The findings and recommendations from this research program have national significance from
several perspectives, including improved traffic safety and increased competitiveness of the United
States Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) industry. The successful deployment of effective sensor-
based systems obviously requires a foundation of reliable and low-cost enabling technologies. These
results can be used by NHTSA to further its understanding of currently available technologies and to
assess system reliability in benefits analyses for crash-avoidance applications. Finally, the radar supplier
can use the results of this research effort to further the commercial development of these sensor
technologies (Thrust Number 4 of NHTSA’s Five-Thrust ITS Strategy).
The various results of this research effort are available in the following:
l This final report summarizes all of the results of the program including discussions of the
roadway tests.
l The “Catalog of Radar Scattering Characteristics for Common Roadway Objects” contains radar
cross-section plots and images for a number of different objects.
l The raw radar cross-section data is also available for downloading from the ERIM Web server:
www.erim.org/Trans/roadobj/.
The key results and conclusions for the program are now briefly summarized.
1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF VEHICLES AND ROADWAY OBJECTS

This program established an initial database for the radar scattering characteristics of a number of
common roadway objects. This database begins to define the environmental framework in which an
automotive radar must operate. Under this program four different “classes” of vehicles were
characterized along with a motorcycle, human, stop sign, and cinder block wall.
Radar data for each object was collected using a 94 GHz Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR)
test facility. The ISAR supported the creation of two-dimensional images for each object at a number of
different aspect angles. The aspect angle refers to the relative orientation between the radar and the
object. For example, a 0 degree aspect angle of a vehicle corresponds to viewing the vehicle head-on
with the radar and a 180 degree aspect angle corresponds to viewing the vehicle from the rear. The two-
dimensional images are color-coded to indicate intensity of the radar returns caused by each section of
the object.
l-l
These images are useful in identifying the various radar scattering attributes of the object. For
example, the impact of side-view mirrors, wheel housings, under-body structures, and body panel seams
is evident in the images. Knowledge of the distribution of radar scattering centers across various objects
could prove to be beneficial to radar processing and threat assessment algorithm developers.
In addition to the images, the characterization procedure produced radar cross-section (RCS) values
for each object. The RCS is a quantitative value related to the object’s level of radar reflectivity. The
RCS of each object can be analyzed as a function of aspect angle or a function of range across the object.
For the objects characterized in this program, it was observed that the RCS value can range from a
maximum of approximately +40 dBsm for a 90 degree aspect angle of a Jeep Wrangler, down to
-10 dBsm for a 45 degree aspect angle of a stop sign. The primary factors which account for an object’s
RCS level are the material from which the object is made, the aspect angle between the radar and the
object, and the geometric shape of the object. Square objects with flat surfaces, such as a Jeep Wrangler
or a cinder block wall, exhibited relatively sharp peak RCS values for aspect angles which resulted in
specular returns and much lower returns for aspect angles which deviated from specular orientations. On
the other hand, more rounded objects such as a Geo Metro or a human being resulted in RCS values
which were not as dependent on aspect angle.
The RCS data is critical in defining the dynamic operating envelope of the radar sensor. For
example, from the measurements made in this program, it can be concluded that to detect a human being
within its field-of-view, the radar sensor must have enough sensitivity to identify returns from an object
with an RCS of around -5 dBsm at the systems desired operating range. Furthermore, the radar sensor
must maintain this level of sensitivity when an object with a +40 dBsm RCS is also located within the
radar field-of-view.
1.2 ROADWAY TESTS

The FLAR sensor was subjected to a number of orchestrated and non-orchestrated tests for
evaluating its performance under a variety of roadway scenarios. The primary focus of these tests was to
evaluate how the radar sensor itself interacted with the roadway environment. The TRW FLAR sensor
was designed for an Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) application, and therefore care must be taken in
differentiating between the raw radar sensor performance and the TRW processing performance
associated with the ACC application. To effectively evaluate the radar sensor, TRW provided access to
the raw intermediate frequency (IF) radar signal prior to any TRW processing of the data. This allowed
the raw radar data corresponding to any specific roadway scenario to be captured for subsequent
processing and analysis.
To support the roadway data analysis, ERIM developed a testbed vehicle with data acquisition
capabilities and a data playback software tool. The testbed vehicle provided a means of collecting raw
radar data, TRW-processed radar data (range, range rate, etc.), video of the roadway, and vehicle position
data from a GPS receiver. The GPS position data was combined with position data from other vehicles
to serve as a “truthing” mechanism to assess the accuracy of the FLAR sensor. All of the data was
collected and stored for each test scenario. The data playback software was then used to review the data
and identify areas for further processing and analysis.
The roadway collections were designed to address some pre-defined sensing scenarios of concern,
such as background induced false alarms, vehicle clutter induced falser alarms, tracking as a function of
roadway geometry, and tracking in dynamic traffic of varying density. Appendix E of this report
contains the program test plan.
l-2
Post-collection processing and analysis identified several scenarios as being potentially problematic
for the FLAR sensor in terms of generating false alarms or missed detections. These scenarios are
summarized below:
l Roadside vehicles on a straight roadway were observed to generate-returns in the raw radar
data at certain geometries which could be interpreted as objects within the host vehicle’s lane.
l Adjacent lane vehicles on a straight roadway viewed by the FLAR side beam antennas can
generate multiple returns with significant range separation.
l Guard rails and other roadside objects on curved roadways generated significant returns
which could cause false alarm problems.
l Tracking vehicles around curved roadways could prove to be problematic without knowledge
of the roadway geometry in front of the sensor.
l Near-range cut-ins and tracking of narrow vehicles such as motorcycles could cause missed
detections due to limited radar field-of-view.
l Low RCS vehicles located between radar and large RCS vehicles could cause missed
detections.
l Bridge or other roadway overpasses were observed to generate significant returns in the raw
radar data under certain circumstances.
In general, the radar sensor itself performed very well in the roadway tests. Somewhat counter-intuitive
was the fact that the FLAR performed better under heavier traffic densities than under very light traffic
densities. The response time of the raw radar data signal was virtually instantaneous. Two areas of the
sensor system design were identified as critical to achieving adequate roadway performance: (1) antenna
design and control, and (2) receiver gain control.
1.3 TESTING, EVALUATION AND CERTIFYING METHODOLOGIES

In addition to increasing the general knowledge and understanding of radar sensing in the roadway
environment, the FLAR program has established empirical data and identified procedures to support the
development of methodologies to test, evaluate, and certify sensors for collision avoidance/warning and
adaptive cruise control systems. The program has identified three primary levels at which the testing
should occur:
1. Laboratory testing to characterize and baseline the sensor’s performance.
2. Environmental testing to identify the range of conditions under which the sensor can perform
effectively.
3. Controlled roadway testing to verify algorithmic robustness in specific scenarios of interest to
the intended application.
The objective of the laboratory characterization is to validate the standard performance specifications
of the sensor. These specifications include ranging accuracy, range rate accuracy, range resolution,
transmitted power, and field-of-view. The accuracy and stability of these performance specifications are
innately linked to the sensor electronic circuitry. For example, it was discovered during the
characterization of the FLAR sensor that the modulation rate was not exactly equal to that specified.
This error was manifested in a reported “range to target” error which increased with higher ranges. It
will be necessary for some quality control inspection of manufactured sensors to be performed to verify
fundamental electronic performance. This is especially critical since the cost constraints for automotive-
based equipment forces tradeoffs in sensor design and circuitry utilization.
The objective of the environmental testing is to identify sensor performance degradation
susceptibility in terms of precipitation interference, material occlusion, and radome/target contamination.
l-3
Precipitation tests conducted with the FLAR sensor showed that 94 GHz energy was only marginally
affected by various types of airborne precipitation (e.g., rain, snow, and fog). In particular, the
precipitation did not induce any observable return levels in the raw radar data, and the attenuation levels
were low (in most cases <1 dB/10 m for two-way travel). Of course these attenuation levels are
dependent upon precipitation density and particulate size. The most significant outcomes of the
precipitation tests were that the radar detected objects within its field-of-view even though the objects
were partially or totally visually obscured. Furthermore, material tests indicated that while items such as
plastic and glass may cause significant attenuation, 94 GHz energy does exhibit material penetration
capabilities which will allow for concealment of the sensor within the automobile structure. The key to
environmental testing is to insure that the sensor system operates appropriately under all likely
conditions, or that the system can detect when its ability to perform has deteriorated and notify the
operator.
The objective of the “controlled” roadway testing is to validate operation at a systems level. This
takes into account not only the raw sensor performance, but also the processing and threat assessment or
vehicle tracking algorithms for the ACC and CWS applications. This program has identified a number of
scenarios which could prove to be problematic for an automobile-based radar sensor. The scenarios
which have been cited are by no means exhaustive, but they do provide a starting point around which
specific standard testing procedures can be developed. Repeatability of these standard testing procedures
is necessary to allow both developers and OEM’s to verify acceptable system operation under the same
conditions. The vision of this testing process is to define a roadway scene in terms various objects,
vehicles, and calibrated radar reflectors positioned to recreate a real-world roadway scenario of interest.
The host vehicle can then drive a predetermined trajectory through this scene and the sensor system
performance can be evaluated. Both the roadway and RCS data collected as part of this FLAR program
will support the definition of the standard roadway scenes discussed above.
1.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND SUGGESTED FUTURE EFFORTS

In summary, this FLAR program has:
l Increased the general knowledge and understanding of vehicle-based radar sensing of the
roadway environment.
l Established a radar cross-section database for a number of common roadway objects. This
database begins to defme the operational envelope in which a vehicle-based radar sensor must
operate. The database also supports advance simulation of the roadway environment.
l Identified a number of roadway scenarios which could be problematic for a vehicle-based sensor
system. Empirical data on these scenarios will support the creation of standardized repeatable
roadway testing procedures.
l Evaluated the weather performance and material penetration characteristics of a 94 GHz radar
sensor.
l Established criteria for the baseline characterization and testing of the vehicle-based radar
sensors.
The program results are available to interested parties in the form of this final report, an RCS
catalog, and data on the world-wide web.
The results of this program serve to aid system developers and evaluators in terms of a more clearly
defined operating environment and criteria for meaningful testing procedures. However, the successful
deployment of radar technology in vehicle-based applications requires more work in many areas
including:
l-4
. Mutual Interference Issues
l Manufacturing, Installation, and Calibration Issues
l Use of Simulation to Refine Sensor Design and Algorithm Implementation
l Human Factors and Response to Nuisance Alarms
l Human Factors and Response to Avoidance Maneuvers
‘.‘?
--
,
1-5
2.0 INTRODUCTION
The goal of this research program was to increase the knowledge and understanding of radar sensing
in the roadway environment by conducting structured testing of TRW’s prototype automotive radar
sensor, or FLAR, in real-world freeway settings. To achieve this goal, the following program objectives
were established:
l to fully characterize TRW’s FLAR in a controlled laboratory setting,
l to measure radar cross-sections of representative automobiles and roadway objects,
l to measure the performance of the FLAR in a variety of freeway settings,
l to provide data to TRW for refining its prototype sensor design, and
. to begin developing methodologies to test, evaluate, and certify sensors for collision avoidance
systems.
The results and findings from this research effort are summarized by program objective. Feedback
to TRW regarding the performance of its FLAR was provided throughout the program, and was not
executed as a specific task. Testing and evaluation methodologies were addressed as part of each testing
task. The Annual Reports provide a chronological summary of the Program’s activities over the first two
years. The third year was dedicated to roadway testing. Most of the test data, results, and supporting
information can be found in the appendices.
2.1 TRW FORWARD-LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR (FLAR)

TRW provided two prototype automotive radars and technical support for test and evaluation. The
first prototype, a single-beam radar, was only used during the first year of the program. At the start of
the second year, TRW provided a radar with a greater azimuth field-of-view and multiple beams within
this field-of-view. The integration of this higher performing radar into the test program greatly enhanced
the value of the experimental results. There was a cost, however. Roadway tests were delayed for
almost one year because the data acquisition system to had to be changed significantly to accommodate
the radar upgrades. ERIM conducted a characterization procedure on each radar sensor to baseline
performance. Much of the characterization parameters served to verify TRW’s measurements as well as
indicate areas where design improvements could increase sensor performance. Section 4 of this report
provides a discussion of the characterization procedures and a description of the FLAR's baseline
performance.
2.2 MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

The Materials Tests were performed in a controlled, off-roadway setting in which all the test objects
were stationary. The intent was to quantitatively assess the effect on the quality of the received signal
produced by the environment in which these systems will be deployed and by typical materials used in
cars and roadway construction. Baseband, time-domain data [i.e., before any signal processing such as
the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)], were collected and stored for off-line analysis. The following
materials were evaluated: glass, plastic composite, Plexiglas, cardboard, wood, and rubber. The
environmental test conditions included dry, raining, snowing, fog, contamination of radome, and
contamination of target. Test data is provided in Appendix B.
2-l
2.3 RADAR CROSS-SECTION
The rnauner in which vehicles and other roadway objects interact with electromagnetic energy
emitted by a radar is characterized by the object’s radar cross-section, or RCS. The radar model
presented in Appendix A explains the role of RCS in the overall performance of a radar for this
application. RCS measurements were included in this program for two reasons: (1) to provide
diagnostic data to support the analysis and evaluation of roadway tests; and (2) to initiate the
development of a radar signatures database. The results of this effort were presented at the SPIE
Conference in 19951 and at a meeting of the AVCS Committee held during the 1996 Annual Meeting of
ITS America. While the RCS portion of the FLAR program effort was relatively small, response to the
data produced was quite high on the part of automotive sensor developers.
2.4 ROADWAY TESTS

The Roadway Tests were conducted in both structured (on test tracks) and unstructured (on
freeways) settings. To support these tests a data acquisition and analysis system had to be developed,
and then upgraded when the prototype radar was upgraded (see Appendix C). This system was
demonstrated at the 1995 Annual Meeting of ITS America, and at the AVCS Committee Meeting and
Vehicle Demonstrations held at the Transportation Research Center (TRC) Inc., in East Liberty, Ohio in
August, 1996. In addition, a differential GPS system was developed (see Appendix D) as a truthing tool.
The structured tests (see Appendix E) were conducted at the TRC in October and November, 1996
according to a test plan developed in cooperation with NHTSA. The detailed test results of the
structured test can be found in Appendix F and results from the unstructured tests found in Appendix G.
2.5 SUMMARY
This final report concludes with a summary of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations,
focused on the use of a forward-looking radar for Adaptive Cruise Control Applications.
1 “Millimeter Wave Scattering Characteristics and Radar Cross Section Measurements of Common Roadway
Objects,” P.K. Zoratti, J.J. Ference, R. Majewski, and R.K. Gilbert, SPIE Proceedings on Collision Avoidance and
Automated Traffic Management Sensors, Vol. 2592, Philadelphia, PA, 25-26 October 1995.
2-2
3.0 MEASUREMENT OF TARGET
CHARACTERISTICS/SIGNATURES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This section summarizes ERIM’s activities and findings for Task 3: Measurement of Target
Characteristics/Signatures. The objective of Task 3 was to measure the radar scattering characteristics
(e.g., the radar cross-section, or RCS) of representative roadway objects, using ERIM’s Fine Resolution
Rotary Platform Imaging Facility. This imaging approach is valuable because it provides system
developers not only with calibrated radar data, but also with two-dimensional radar images. From these,
information about individual point scatterers within a single target can be extracted. This information on
scattering characteristics can be used to refine processing algorithms for threat assessment, guide the
design of automotive radar hardware, and supplement automotive radar simulation programs.
To create a database of radar scattering characteristics for roadway objects, radar data was collected
for the following objects:
l 1990 Chevy Corvette ZR-1
l 1995 Ford Taurus
l 1991 Jeep Wrangler
l 1993 Geo Metro EFI
l Honda Motorcycle
l 180 lb. person

l Stop Sign with a square post
l Cinder Block Wall
The entire set of data collected on these objects has been processed and organized into a “Catalog of
Radar Scattering Characteristics for Common Roadway Objects.” The NHTSA-OCAR has a version of
this catalog containing black-and-white images. A catalog with full color images is available from
ERIM at a nominal price to cover reproduction costs. Also, the data which constitutes the plots in the
catalog can be downloaded from ERIM’s Web server: www.erim.org/Trans/roadobj/.
The remainder of this section will discuss:
l background on the need for radar scattering characteristic data;
. methods for making the radar measurements;
l techniques for reducing the measurements to RCS data; and
l general descriptions of the various data output products, with guidelines for interpreting the data.
The section concludes with some general observations and conclusions based on the RCS data. This
includes summary information on the variation of return levels and the RCS dependency on aspect angle.
3.2 BACKGROUND
Well-characterized radar RCS data will be essential for developing the guidelines and standards that
will affect all phases of a radar-based product’s lifecycle, from inception through installation on a
vehicle. It begins with the design of both the hardware and the signal processing algorithms, includes
methodologies for test and evaluation, and finally, certification that the devices meet specific
3-l
performance standards. The need for performance certification will be driven by the need to provide
some legal protection against liability claims. At some point, crash avoidance systems will be offered to
the public as features that wil1 make the automobile safer to operate. The possible causes for a “failure”
are many, and suppliers will want a basis for demonstrating that their products perform as advertised.
This Radar Signatures Database is a mechanism for sharing information. As it is developed, it will
eliminate redundant measurement activities on the part of developers to make their own measurements.
This should reduce development costs, which in turn should reduce time-to-market and cost to the
consumer.
For a given radar, the return from a roadway object will vary as a function of many parameters.
These parameters include, but certainly are not limited to, the range and azimuth angle to the target, the
target’s geometry and materials, the weather, and surrounding roadway environment, which includes
other vehicles and non-moving roadway objects. Each of these parameters can take on many values.
The problem is further compounded by the number of radar parameters that can be varied. This literally
results in a combinatoric explosion in the number of possible test conditions. Clearly such a problem
must be approached in a structured and orderly manner. Creation of the Radar Signatures Database will
be one method for bringing this problem under control.
3.3 RADAR MEASUREMENTS

The data for the Radar Signatures Database were collected on ERIM’s Fine Resolution Rotary
Platform Facility. The radar system is based on an HP85 10 Network Analyzer. The objective of the
RCS collection task was to collect 94 GHz radar data for a number of roadway objects at various aspect
angles. ERIM’s Rotary Platform Facility (RPF) was well suited for the task. The RPF consists of a radar
antenna pedestal mounted on the outside wall of ERIM’s building and 22-foot diameter turntable located
135 feet from the pedestal. The turntable is capable of supporting up to 20,000 lbs and provides a
convenient way to vary target aspect angles.
There are two important issues regarding the RCS measurements. The first deals with near-field/far-
field effects. Radar cross section (RCS) is normally defined when the incident radar wave is a plane
wave; consequently, RCS is normally a “far-field” RCS. The normal requirement for being in the far-
field is that the phase deviation from planar is less than 22.5 degrees which translates to a range of at
least 2D2/h where D is the target diameter and h is the wavelength. For example, a target with a 2-meter
diameter being illuminated by a 77 GHz radar would have to be 2053 meters away to be in the far-field;
consequently, automotive radars certainly can operate in the “near-field” when considering objects the
size of vehicles. With the collection set-up utilized on ERIM’s RPF, the illumination pattern from the
94 GHz radar would be considered to be in the far-field (based on the size of the transmit antenna and
range to the platform); however, scatterers which are larger than 0.2 meters may exhibit near-field
reflection characteristics. For example, in the far-field, a simple target like a flat plate has a reflection
characteristic with a (sin X/X)2 pattern. As the range to the flat plate decreases below the far-field range,
the nulls in the pattern fill in and the sidelobes increase. The overall effect of operating in the “near-
field” is that the RCS patterns are range dependent and not constant. The RCS measurements provided
in this report correspond to a specific range (40 meters). This should not be considered a significant
limitation in analyzing the data for peak return levels and aspect angle characteristics.
The second issue is related to the radar illumination frequency. The measurements were made at
94 GHz to correspond to the TRW FLAR unit operating frequency. The TRW FLAR design is based on
military radar technology; however since the inception of this program, the FCC has approved the 76 to
77 GHz band for automotive radar applications. The question therefore arises as to what effect the
change in frequency will have on the RCS measurements which were made. The frequency change from
77 to 94 GHz is only 22 percent, so the changes in the RCS pattern for a simple reflector such as a flat
3-2
plate will be minor. However, with a complex object like a vehicle, the RCS is the vector summation of
the contributions from a large number of individual scatterers distributed across the target. These
individual scattering centers act independently of one another and as the range to the object changes, the
phases of the contributions from the individual scattering centers will be different for 77 and 94 GHz.
The locations of the peaks and nulls of the RCS pattern will vary with frequency; however the mean
value of the RCS will not change significantly, and essential characteristics of the target RCS will be the
same.
3.3.1 Experimental Setup

Figure 3-l illustrates the physical set-up for the data collection. The Network Analyzer based radar
operates in a linear-FM (chirp) pulse mode. The Network Analyzer creates a baseband signal with
2 GHz of bandwidth, centered at 10 GHz. This signal is then amplified and sent to the RF plate, where it
is up-converted from a 10 GHz to a 94 GHz center frequency and radiated at the target on the rotary
platform using a standard gain horn antenna. The standard gain horn has an approximately 9 degree
azimuth beamwidth which illuminates the entire platform. Signals reflected back from the target to the
radar are captured by the RPF’s receiver and down-converted to baseband and input to the network
analyzer. The radar system preserves both the amplitude and the phase of the reflected signals. This
information is downloaded from the network analyzer to a PC-based data acquisition system via an
IEEE-488 communications bus.
In addition to storing the radar data, the PC also interfaces with an optical shaft encoder mounted on
the rotary platform. The turntable must be driven at a very slow speed (e .g., 0.02 degrees/sec), due to the
low PRF of the HP8510 and high image resolution requirements. The shaft encoder allows the table
position to be exactIy correlated with the collected radar data.
8510 PC Blue cable

Bus Connection GPIB-BUS
Labeled HP-IB
In Middle of Unit Shaft Encoder
S-Pararneter Test
D)
PORTl PORT2 female
Flexible RF Cable (SHEA1HED) I SMA
adapter
RF Input
female
135 foot
83349B Range to
Microwave Amplifier Center of Rotary
Heliax Cable/ RX Table Platform
Optical
RF Output \ TIC ,__.....______,___.. Shaft
L-----""'l"ffi~----1 RF HEAD Encoder
L--------'i'~L-----1 PLA1E
T-7S43U-30 Isolator
Teledyne Microwave 24022
Figure 3-l. Data Collection Set-up
3-3
3.3.2 Data Collection
The table was rotated at a fixed rate to illuminate the objects from a continuum of aspect angles, so
that Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR) processing techniques could be implemented, as described
below, to produce fine azimuthal measurements of the target.
The radar collection system was calibrated prior to each measurement using a series of reference
reflectors located on the platform. The reference reflectors have known radar cross-section (RCS)
values. The calibration procedure produces a +3 dB accuracy across the rotary platform surface. Higher
accuracies can be achieved by compensating for actual target range in the processing software, but this
technique was not used here.
The vehicular objects and cinder block wall were located on the center of the table during the
collection process. The human and the stop sign were located approximately 3 feet off-center to avoid
any obscuration from stationary clutter fold-in. The surface between the collection radar and the rotary
platform is fairly level, grass-covered ground. No multipath fences were employed during collections of
the roadway objects, but they were used during the calibration procedure.
Table 3-1 summarizes the radar parameters used for these data collections.
Table 3- 1. Radar Parameters
Radar Parameter Specification
Mode of Operation Linear-FM Pulsed
Center Frequency 94 GHz
Bandwidth 2 GHz
Transmitted Power @ 100 mW
Polarization H/H
Pulse Repetition Frequency @ 2 Hz I
3.4 DATA PROCESSING

The collected radar reflections were downloaded from the collection PC to a Sun/UNIX workstation.
The radar data (pulses) are floating point vectors that contain 801 arithmetically complex samples; that
is, the samples have both a real and an imaginary part, which are thematically combined to represent the
amplitude and phase of the radar returns.
The first processing operation suppresses the stationary clutter. Stationary clutter is energy reflected
by all illuminated radar scatterers that were not a part of the rotating platform, such as the earth
immediately surrounding the rotating table. To suppress the clutter, the processing software computes
the coherent average of all pulses from the collection run. Because the energy reflected by scatterers on
the platform averages approximately zero over the course of a complete platform rotation, the averaging
operation produces an estimate of the return from only the stationary scatterers. The processing software
then subtracts the average from each pulse, thereby suppressing the stationary clutter.
Following clutter suppression, the processing software performs a forward FFT on each pulse,
mapping the data to the range-frequency (image) domain. The 801 samples cover a range swath that is
about 60 meters wide. The center 120 samples are then extracted to provide a range subswath that is
about 9 meters wide and centered on the platform. An inverse FFT is performed on the subset of
120 samples to map the data back to the time domain for subsequent processing.
3-4
The signal data next passes to the image formation processing software, where the image formation
processor (IFP) produces two-dimensional images of the target by applying the polar format algorithm
(PFA). The radar data could be processed directly into imagery with a two-dimensional FFT. However,
FFT-based processing provides little control over image aspect ratio and it does not compensate the radar
signal history for nonuniformities in the rotation rate of the platform. These nonuniformities can lead to
azimuthal resolution variations in the final image. Because the PFA requires range and azimuth
resampling of the signal history data, the processor provides the user with a ready mechanism for setting
and maintaining both image resolution and aspect ratio.
The PFA also offers a mode of operation known as stabilized scene processing. Stabilized scene
processing holds the orientation of the target constant from image to image, at an orientation angle
specified by the user. When viewing a sequence of stabilized scene images, the radar appears to rotate
around the target. Stabilized scene processing permits the processing software to form an additional
output product known as a noncoherently integrated image, which is the sum of the magnitudes from a
sequence of stabilized scene images. If the sequence of images covers 360 degrees of aspect angle
change, the noncoherently integrated image will be a picture of the aggregate radar scattering of the
illuminated target.
3.5 DATA OUTPUT PRODUCTS AND INTERPRETATION

Through informal discussions with parties interested in the RCS data, it became evident that the end-
users would like the data processed and presented in a variety of ways. Therefore, we have created five
different data output products:
1 Maximum Return Level versus Aspect Angle (Aspect Profile) Plot
2. Return Level versus Range (Range Profile) Plot
3. Two-Dimensional Image “Movie”
4. Two-Dimensional Image--Single Aspect Angle
5. Two-Dimensional Image--Integration of Multiple Aspect Angles
The following subsections describe these five data output products, how they should be interpreted,
their potential utility, and current availability. Examples from the “Catalog of Radar Scattering
Characteristics for Common Roadway Objects” are used in the explanation of each data type.
3.5.1 Maximum Return Level Versus Aspect Angle (Aspect Profile) Plot
Figure 3-2 is an example of a Maximum Return Level versus Aspect Angle Plot for the 1991 Jeep
Wrangler. The aspect profile data indicates the maximum return level of the target as a function of
aspect angle for a 360 degree rotation. The y-axis of the plot is the maximum return level (given in
dBsm) for the corresponding aspect angle given on the x-axis. Note that the data reports the maximum
return level, and not the total RCS of the object. The maximum return level corresponds to the highest
power level observed in any given range cell (range cells for this data are approximately 7.5 cm). The
maximum return levels are given in dBsm, corresponding to the radar cross-section of the most reflective
scatterer on the object. Aspect angle values have been defined such that a 0 degree aspect angle
corresponds to illuminating the object from a head-on orientation, a 90 degree aspect angle corresponds
to illuminating the object from the left side (or driver side for a vehicle), a 180 degree aspect angle
corresponds to illuminating the object from the rear, and a 270 degree aspect angle corresponds to
illuminating the object from the right side (or passenger side for a vehicle)
3-5
Calibrated Peak Returns for Jeep
082495c.aspcc t.profile
40.00 7----rr----+---+---
3!1.00 ,---tt----t----¼~---
:!10.00 -r----~tt-------it--~--~~_J_____
0.00
Aspect Angle (Deg)

0.00 100.00 200.00 3 00.00
Figure 3-2. Example of Aspect Profile Plot
These data plots are useful for defining the dynamic operating envelope under which an automotive
. radar must operate. For example, the maximum return levels for the targets measured in this effort
ranged from -12 dBsm (a stop sign at its lowest return aspect angle) to +42 dBsm (the Jeep at its highest
return aspect angle). This means that the radar must be able to handle returns from targets of this size
over its operating range. Another use for this type of data is in high-level simulation programs which do
not require high fidelity in the radar models. One could use the data in these types of plots as a look-up
table for expected reflectivity, given a specific aspect angle as generated under a particular scenario in
the simulation program. The return level is provided in dBsm so that the user can scale expected power
level returns according to individual radar configurations and range to target. The user should note,
however, that since many automotive radars operate in the near-field, radar cross-section (RCS) is range
dependent rather than constant (see Section 3.3).
These types of plots are available in both hard copy and electronic forms. Hard copies of these plots
for each target are included in “Catalog of Radar Scattering Characteristics for Common Roadway
Objects” which is provided as an appendix to this report in a black-and-white version. A color version is
available from ERIM ($400). The data for these plots can also be downloaded at no charge from ERIM’s
Web server: www.erim.org/Trans/roadobj/.
3.5.2 Return Level Versus Range Plot (Range Profile) for a Given Aspect Angle
Figure 3-3 is an example of a Return Level versus Range Plot for the BMW motorcycle, at a
180 degree aspect angle. The y-axis of the plot is the return for the corresponding range given on the
3-6
x-axis. The return levels are given in dBsm, which corresponds to the radar cross-section of the
scatterer(s) which constitute the return from that particular range. The range values correspond to the
distance across ERIM’s rotary platform table. The table itself is approximately 6.7 meters across.
Therefore, a range of 0 corresponds to the edge of the platform nearest to the-radar, and a range
6.66 meters corresponds to the edge of the platform farthest from the radar. Each object (except the
human and the stop sign) was positioned near the center of the table. Aspect angle values follow the
definition provided in the previous section.
These types of data plots are useful for observing how the individual scatterers on the target are
distributed as a function of range. Knowledge of scatterer distribution may be helpful in developing
algorithms which group multiple scatterers together as a single target, to reduce the burden on tracking
algorithms. Another use for this data type is in more advanced simulation programs which can utilize the
range profiles to simulate targets at a given aspect angle in a particular scenario. The return level is
provided in dBsm to allow the user to scale expected power level returns according to individual radar
configurations and range to target, however the user should note that since many automotive radars
operate in the near-field, radar cross-section (RCS) is range dependent, and is not constant.
Motor Cycle Scan 14334
dBsm
0.00
-5.00
JJ
-10..00
~
-15.00
u
1 Ml ~ ~ VI
~
J
-25.00
-30.00
I II
V
N
-35..00
-40.00
-45.00
lbngc(m)
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Figure 3-3. Example of Range Profile Plot
3.5.3 Two-Dimensional Image “Movie”

Since the radar data was collected and processed using Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar (ISAR)
techniques, a two-dimensional image of the illuminated object can be formed. A series of images can be
linked together to create a dynamic “movie.” The movie is a sequence of radar images taken at various
3-7
aspect angles and illustrates how the radar return levels vary as the vehicle is rotated. ERIM has a movie
of a Ford Taurus available on its world-wide web server: www.erim.org/Trans/roadobj/.
The images in the movie are oriented such that the radar is illuminating from the right side and the
observer is looking straight down at the vehicle. Therefore, range is in the horizontal direction and
cross-range (i.e., azimuth) is in the vertical direction. The images in the movie are also color-coded, so
that low level returns are represented by dark colors (e g., blue and green) and higher Ievel returns are
shown as brighter colors (e.g., orange and yellow). The movie indicates how very high-level returns
occur when the front, rear, or sides of the vehicle are perpendicular to the radar illumination. This is due
to specular (mirror-like) reflections of the radar energy. As the vehicle rotates away from the 0,90, 180,
or 270-degree aspect angles, the return levels drop off significantly.
Viewing the data in a movie-type format visually illustrates the dynamic changes in radar return
levels with changing aspect angle. Aspect angles which correspond to low return levels can be easily
identified for further analysis using the other forms of data output.
Production of these movies was achieved using ERIM’s proprietary image manipulation software.
Therefore, the movies are not publicly available. Organizations which have special requirements and are
interested in viewing movies of other roadway objects can contact ERIM directly.
3.5.4 Two-Dimensional Image-Single Aspect Angle

Figure 3-4 shows black-and-white radar images and corresponding range profile plots of a 1990
Chevy Corvette at 170 and 180 degree aspect angles, respectively. The images are oriented such that the
radar is illuminating from the left side and you are looking straight down at the vehicle. Therefore, range
is in the horizontal direction and cross-range (i.e., azimuth) is in the vertical direction. The resolution
cell of each image is approximately 7.5 by 7.5 centimeters. The images are coded with grey-shades to
represent the radar return levels as designated in the scale on each image. The corresponding range
profile plot is included below each image to illustrate how a vehicle-based radar might “view” this
object.
3-8
.......
....,
......
.....
Co...,,,tt,. SCl&ll 13753
wm -. .......
....
.....
........
r
...... ,I\ IA
..1000
---
_,....,
...... ,~
1.R V\
I 1
.
.. t=ao
-·--
-·-- ..
~ r
·1,
I\ .I'll
..1aoo
4000
'I
I ,I I
,,. 1ft
Ill.I
II
11 II
,II,
• ,
UI
•llll
),I l--t/11/
V u
·w1. r
~
.,
,I'
"""·°"
......... u
.......
--.--·-
II I I.ID. 1 I 11
----.......
I
I ( r•· I I
•""-00
II I
:I
..0 ...
_,.,_
·- ·- - -- -
. . . OD
._
.. a.OD
- 170 Degree Aspect Angle 180 Degree Aspect Angle

·- .__ ...
.._ ,
Figure 3-4. Examples of Single Aspect Angle Images
These images allow the observer to identify individual scattering centers on the object which are
active at a given aspect angle. This information can help to explain observations during static or
roadway testing of vehicle-based radar sensors. For example, the range profile plot for the 180 degree
aspect angle exhibits a “double hump” in the return which may puzzle some researcher. However, the
image clearly shows that the second hump is due to a multipath return off the transmission housing
underneath the vehicle.
3.5.5 Two-Dimensional Image--Integrated from Multiple Aspect Angles

A noncoherently integrated radar image of a 1993 Geo Metro is shown in Figure 3-5. This image
was created by integrating the returns from multiple aspect images, like those discussed in the previous
section, spaced at 5-degree increments. The image appears as though the object was being illuminated
from all aspect angles simultaneously and you are looking straight down at the vehicle. Therefore, range
is in the horizontal direction and cross-range (i.e., azimuth) is in the vertical direction. The resolution
cell of the image is approximately 7.5 by 7.5 centimeters.
3-9
Figure 3-5. Example of Noncoherently Integrated Radar Image
The noncoherently integrated image allows the observer to identify all of the individual scattering
centers on a given object. This information can help to explain observations during static or roadway
testing of vehicle-based radar sensors. These types of images have been made for all of the vehicles on
which data has been collected.
Hard copies of these plots for each target are included in “Catalog of Radar Scattering
Characteristics for Common Roadway Objects” which is provided as an appendix to this report in a
black-and-white version. A color version is available from ERIM ($400).
3.6 INITIAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

It is anticipated that the various data output products described above will find great utility in future
automotive radar simulation programs and as guidelines for future designs and testing. Analysis of the
RCS data has yielded a number of observations which will now be discussed.
Maximum and Minimum RCS Values

Observations of the RCS data indicate that reflectivity of common roadway objects can vary from
over +40 dBsm for the broadside view of a Jeep-type vehicle to below -2 dBsm for a motorcycle or even
-10 dBsm for an irregularly shaped sign post. This means that in order to detect these various objects in
a given roadway scenario, the automotive radar must have a dynamic range greater than 50 dB. In
addition, the noise floor of the receiver must be low enough to reliably detect targets with RCS values as
low as -5 to -10 dBsm at the maximum operating range of the system.
3-10
Return Levels From Aspect Angles Around 180 Degrees
Two of the primary applications of automotive radar will be for Intelligent Cruise Control purposes
and for mitigating rear-end collisions. Therefore, the return levels from vehicles when illuminated from
the rear (i.e., a 180 degree aspect angle) are critical. In evaluating the aspect profiles of the various
vehicles measured in this effort, it was observed, as expected, that all of them except the motorcycle
provided a significant return at 180 degrees due to specular reflections from the rear structure of the
vehicles. It was also observed that as one deviated from the 180 degree view, the return level dropped
off at various rates, based on the geometric shape of the vehicle. Table 3-2 shows the minimum angular
departure from a 180 degree aspect at which the RCS of the vehicle drops below the specified value. For
example, the reflectivity of a Taurus was observed to drop below 5 dBsm when the aspect angle was
below 170 degrees or above 190 degrees.
Table 3-2. Characteristic RCS Fall-Off
Angle of Departure Angle of Departure Angle of Departure
From 180 at Which From 180 at Which From 180 at Which
Vehide RCS >O dBsm RCS >5 dBsm RCS >10 dBsm
Jeep +180
_ +180
_ _+5
Taurus _+20 _+10 +5
_
Geo Metro +_4 0 _
+30 _
+5
Corvette _
+30 _
+10 0
Motorcycle _+2 0 0
Looking at these numbers indicates that the reflectivity of certain classes of vehicles will drop below
0 dBsm at aspect angles which can be expected to be incurred during normal driving. Obviously the
motorcycle poses the largest problem, but even the Taurus and the Corvette will fall below 0 dBsm in
road curves. The effects of low RCS levels at common aspect angles will be tested during the road tests
planned for this program.
Distribution of Scatterers Across Targets

The range profile plots, single aspect images, and radar image movies demonstrate that the radar
energy scatterers are distributed across the extent of the target; they include side-view mirrors, wheels,
under-body structures, in-vehicle components, body panel seams, and so forth. The relevance of this
attribute to automotive radar is that tracking the returns from each individual scattering center will place
an enormous burden on the radar processing and threat assessment electronics. The ability to group
these returns into a single object is highly desirable. However, the RCS data indicates that this will not
be a trivial task as the object’s signature can change significantly with a minute change in aspect angle.
This is due to the highly dynamic scintillation effects induced by the small wavelength of automotive
radar energy. These effects were observed repeatedly during the roadway tests of this program, in which
the returns from a vehicle being tracked by the FLAR varied over a wide range on a pulse-to-pulse basis.
Non-Vehicular Objects
One concern for automotive radars is the interpretation of returns from objects other than vehicles.
These objects may be considered clutter if they are off to the side of the roadway (like a stop sign), or a
legitimate threat (a pedestrian crossing the roadway). The RCS data collected under this program
indicates that a human being can have a reflectivity between +4 and -6 dBsm. Stop signs have a large
3-11
specular return at a 0 degree aspect angle but can quickly fall below -5 dBsm. Also, like the stop sign, a
block wall (used to simulate a bridge abutment) exhibits a large specular reflectivity which falls off
rapidly as the aspect angle departs from 0 degrees.
Many more observations can be made from the data alone, but as mentioned above, the real utility of
the data will be in its application for simulation programs. We expect to expand on this initial database
during future projects.
It is interesting to note at this point that many of these conclusions, based on the analysis of the RCS
data, were actually observed during the road testing phase of this program (see Section 6).
3-12
4.0 TRW FORWARD LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR
(FLAR)
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Most of the radar testing in this program, excluding the RCS measurements of common roadway
objects, was made using a TRW Forward Looking Automotive Radar (FLAR) The FLAR was provided
by TRW and integrated into ERIM’s testbed vehicle collection system. Its purpose was to serve as a
“generic” automotive radar sensor and provide the basic signals from which ERIM could evaluate the
interaction between the radar and its surrounding environment. It should be emphasized that the purpose
of the experiments conducted in this program was NOT to test the hardware configuration or algorithms
employed in TRW’s design. On the contrary, the measurements were designed to isolate the results (as
much as possible) from specific attributes of the TRW radar implementation.
This section will first describe the configuration and operation of the TRW radar and then present the
results of basic tests conducted to determine baseline performance characteristics. These characteristics
were used in subsequent roadway testing of the unit.
4.2 SENSOR CONFIGURATION

The TRW FLAR, model AICC-3B, utilizes 94 GHz radar technology originally developed for
military purposes. The FLAR has 3 electronically switched transmit beams and 1 receive beam. Each
transmit beam has 3 dB widths of 3 degrees in azimuth and 3 degrees in elevation. The receive beam is
approximately 9 degrees in azimuth and 3 degrees in elevation. With this configuration, the sensor’s
field-of-view is adjusted by directing the signal to be transmitted to the appropriate transmit antenna.
The TRW AICC-3B FLAR consists of two elements (Figure 4-l): the RF head, which contains the
transmit/receive antennas and the analog circuitry, and the DSP module which contains the processing
unit and the interfaces to the host system (the test computer in the testbed vehicle). The DSP
communicates to the RF head via three cables: one for the power connection, one for the radar data, and
one for the beam selection bits. The DSP communicates with the host system via three cables: one cable
for primary power and the other two for data communication.
In the ERIM testbed vehicle, the RF head is located on a hard mount in front of the vehicle grill,
providing a field-of-view uncontaminated by any vehicle structural members. The DSP is located in the
vehicle cabin along with the test computer rack.
4-1
QSPModule RF Head
IF Output Settmg
Select
RS-232
Status, Range,
Range Rate. Control
12 Volts Ramp
- - - Power Generator
Power
Figure 4-1. TRW's AICC-3B FLAR
4.3 SENSOR OPERATION
4.3.1 General Overview

The TRW FLAR employs a pulsed frequency-modulated, continuous wave (FMCW) radar front-end
to determine the distance to objects located in its field-of-view (FOV). A high-level functional block
diagram of the TRW radar sensor is shown in Figure 4-1. The following sequence of events describes
the process to generate, transmit, and receive a single radar pulse:
1. The pulse generator within the RF head generates a modulation signal which dictates the
fundamental timing of the radar.
2. The modulation signal (a square wave) drives the ramp generator, which creates a linearized
voltage ramp during the active phase of the modulation signal.
3. The voltage ramp drives the voltage-controlled oscillator (VCO) which outputs a linear
frequency modulated signal referred to as a chirp. The chirp bandwidth is at 375 MHz centered
at 94 GHz and the chirp rate is at 3 MHz/usec.
4. The chirp signal is amplified and divided into 2 identical signals. One version of the signal is fed
to one of the transmit antennas and emitted into the atmosphere. The other version of the chirp is
input to the de-chirp mixer (discussed below).
5. A portion of the transmitted energy reflects off objects in the radar's FOV and is intercepted by
the receive antenna.
6. The received energy is amplified and input to the de-chirp mixer. The de-chirp mixer subtracts
the frequency of the received signal from that of the transmitted signal. Therefore, the de-chirp
mixer output signal frequency is proportional to the range of the object which reflected the
energy. (This is a fundamental concept ofFMCW radar.)
7. The de-chirped signal is fed to the Automatic Gain Control (AGC) amplifier which adjusts the
signal level to keep it within the dynamic range of the analog-to-digital (AID) converter. The
AGC control signal is generated by the sensor control circuitry located in the DSP Module.
4-2
8. The IF signal is further amplified and low-pass filtered before the A/D converter digitizes the de-
chirped signal so it can be processed by the FLAR’s DSP circuitry.
9. The DSP circuitry uses frequency-domain analysis to determine range to deteeted objects and
sequential range differentiation to determine relative range rate.
The radar pulse has a signal bandwidth of 375 MHz centered at 94 GHz. The received signal is de-
chirped and down-converted to a base band signal with a bandwidth of 2 MHz.
The description above corresponds to the sequence involved in processing a single radar pulse. The
TRW FLAR integrates the energy from multiple pulses to improve the signal-to-noise ratio and therefore
increases the sensor’s detection capability. Depending on the mode, the TRW DSP electronics will
integrate the returns from five or six pulses.
The ERIM interface with the radar IF signal occurs prior to any digitization, as illustrated in
Figure 4-l. Therefore, the ERIM data collection system A/D converter has an input signal similar to that
of the TRW DSP Module (see Appendix C). ERIM’s processing algorithms can analyze both individual
and groups of pulses.
4.3.2 Timing Specifications

As mentioned above, the FLAR processor integrates a number of pulses together to improve the
signal-to-noise performance of the radar. Each group of pulses is fully processed and an update provided
over the RS232 interface before the next group of pulses is transmitted. A radar frame consists of one set
of pulses and the processing time before the next set of pulses is transmitted-this also corresponds to
the data update rate of the sensor. The rate at which pulses are sent out is known as the pulse repetition
frequency (PRF). The number of pulses within a group is dependent on the operating mode. The sensor
timing parameters for the FLAR are shown in Table 4- 1.
Table 4-l FLAR Timing Parameters
Parameter Value Description
Pulse Duration 123 mS Len!rth of each transmitted pulse
Pulses/Group 6 Acquisition Mode
6 Tracking Mode
5 Surveillance Mode
Pulse-pulse Time 1.87 mS Equivalent PRF of 535 Hz
Frame Time/Update Period 50.2 rnS Equivalent Frame PRF 20 Hz
The timing diagram in Figure 4-2 illustrates the radar timing parameters for the tracking and
acquisition modes. The tests conducted during this program used only the acquisition and tracking
modes of the FLAR and, therefore, always had 6 pulses per radar frame.
4-3
40.7msec
FRAMEN FRAME N+1

6 Pulses per Frame 6 Pulses per Frame
• Diagram not to scale All times are approximate.
Figure 4-2. FLAR Transmit Pulse Timing
4.3.3 Automatic Gain Control (AGC) Amplifier

As described earlier, the FLAR' s automatic gain control (AGC) amplifier keeps radar return levels
within the dynamic range of the ND converter. The plot below illustrates the attenuation (reference to
maximum amplifier gain) of the AGC amplifier. The x-axis corresponds to the control voltage applied to
the AGC amplifier and the y-axis is the corresponding attenuation in dB.
It was critical that the BRIM collection system monitor the AGC control voltage being sent from the
DSP module to the RF head, so that the analysis procedures could account for effects of the AGC on the
signal return levels observed during the tests.
20
0
2 3
--
-20
-40
------- spec dB
-60 ---rreasured dB
-80
-100
-120
Figure 4-3. AGC Attenuation (dB) Versus Voltage (Volts)
4.3.4 Transmitted Waveform

The FLAR generates a linear FM signal referred to as a chirp. Both time and frequency domain
representations of a chirp signal are provided in Figure 4-4.
4-4
Pulse Duration__.. I
F~top
t
Signal B:uidw1d"1
Time Frequency
F,,,,..-
t
Chirp Rate = r -- Signal Banh~idth (MHz/µscc
/µ ) T=O TPu!~ Dur:it1on
Pulse Dunt1on
Time
Figure 4-4. Graphical Representations of a Chirp Waveform
This form of signal is typical in FMCW-type radars. It is the frequency modulation of the
transmitted signal which allows the range-to-targets within the sensor's field-of-view to be calculated.
As shown in Figure 4-5, using a chirp signal results in the range being proportional to frequency.
Signal Ba!Xlwidth
Chirp Rate = r = Pulse Duration (Mo/.,.,.,)
T
Fstop
Signal Bandwidth
F,=
Freque cy
i
F1F1="{ * Td1
F18
FIFl F1F~'Y * Td2
R1= Td1*c/2
T=O R2= Td2*c/2
Time
2* BandwidtJil' PRF *R
F.IF
C
Figure 4-5. Range in Proportion to IF Frequency
The frequency which a remote sensor uses (e.g., 77 GHz or 94 GHz) determines how the energy
· interacts with objects in the environment. For example, lower frequency emissions tend to penetrate
materials more than higher frequencies. The bandwidth of the transmit signal determines the range
resolution for FMCW sensors such as the TRW FLAR.
For the purposes of this program, measuring the transmit waveform parameters served to verify both
FLAR stability and the frequency and bandwidth specifications reported by TRW. Also, the bandwidth
value was used in conjunction with the transmit time (discussed in the previous section) to determine the
chirp rate. The chirp rate allowed the frequency domain analysis of the return signals to be correlated
4-5
with the actual range to objects in the sensor field-of-view. The transmit waveform parameters are
summarized in Table 4-2.
Table 4-2. Transmit Waveform Parameters
Parameter Value
Center Frequency 94.165 GHz

Bandwidth 375 MHz
Chirp Rate (calculated) 3.048 MHz/usec
4.3.5 Intermediate Frequency Signal

The TRW FLAR intermediate frequency (IF) waveform parameters correspond to the signal which is
input to the sensor receiver A/D converter. The IF signal was considered the raw FLAR sensor output
and all the digital signal processing was performed on this signal. The parameters of concern for the IF
signal are frequency, bandwidth, and voltage level. These parameters dictated the required specifications
of the A/D converter and any signal conditioning (e.g., amplification) required prior to the A/D. The
FLAR IF signal parameters are summarized in Table 4-3.
Table 4-3. IF Signal Parameters
Parameter Value
Frequency DC to 2 MHz
Bandwidth 2 MHz
Voltage Range -1 volt to + 1 volt
4.3.6 Power Measurements

The transmit power level of a radar affects the signal-to-noise ratio of the return echoes in the
sensor’s receiver. The higher the transmitted power, the stronger the return echoes from objects in the
scene. Therefore, from a signal-to-noise perspective, the higher the transmit power the better. However,
implementation, cost, and safety issues limit the transmit power level.
The results of direct measurements of the FLAR transmitted waveform are given below:
l Left Beam: 21.7 mW
l Center Beam: 26.6 mW
l Bight Beam: 22.3 mW
These values correlate with the antenna beam pattern measurements made on ERIM’s rotary
platform. Figure 4-6 indicates that the left and right transmit beam power emissions are down slightly
from the center beam.
4-6
ldBID1v
ldBlt>lv
......... _
............... 'l'/D,v•
TRW FLAR TX/RX Beam Patterns TRW B,AR IX Beam P/ltterns
Figure 4-6. FLAR Beam Patterns
4.3.7 Antenna Beam Patterns

The FLAR sensor uses three beams pointed to the left, center, and right of the sensor boresight
(i.e., the vehicle center line). Figure 4-3 illustrates the FLAR beam patterns and their orientation with
respect to each other. TRW uses the three-beam approach in order to implement a search and track
algorithm for an Automated Cruise Control (ACC) application.
Because the goal of this program was to view the FLAR as a generic radar sensor, the TRW beam
switching algorithm was not employed in the testing. An override switch was used to manually select an
active transmit beam during any particular test.
4.3.8 Beam Switch Isolation

As described earlier, the TRW FLAR uses a switch to direct the transmit signal to one of three
separate antennas. The isolation between the different ports of this switch are provided in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4. Beam Switch Isolation
Right Beam (dB) Left Beam (dB) Center Beam (dB)
Left Beam 18.7 I 0 16.2
Center Beam 34.3 30.3 0
Right Beam 0 15.9 18.6
4.4 BASELINE PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS
4.4.1 Radar Field-of-View

The radar’s field-of-view is directly related to the antenna beam patterns discussed above. Several
tests were conducted to determine the basic field of view of the sensor (see Appendix A). These tests
found, as expected, good correlation between the measured beam patterns and azimuthal detection of
targets.
Typically, antenna beam widths are specified in terms of their 3 dB points, which correspond to
locations in the beam pattern where the antenna gain is down 3 dB from its maximum gain. In the case
of the FLAR, each transmit beam has a 3 dB width of 3 degrees in both azimuth and elevation. This
4-7
corresponds to a beam width of approximately one lane width, at 80 meters from the radar. However, as
illustrated in Figure 4-7, the antenna patterns can
detect objects well outside their 3 dB points. Left Beam.
The results of measurements taken on ERIM' s IOdBID1v
rotary platform measurements are shown in

Figure 4-7. These plots show the mainlobes along
. ~. :·: . : -~ -· ---·· .
- ···' ,-.
with the sidelobes for the center, right, and left
antenna beams respectively. A "zoomed" in version
on the mainlobes for each antenna was provided in
Figure4-6.
The left and right antenna beams show a sidelobe
about 12-15 dB below the mainlobe. The left beam
sidelobe is approximately 4.5 degrees from the left Center Beam 18°/Dl\'
beam mainlobe. The right beam sidelobe is
!OdBID1v
approximately 6.5 degrees from the right beam
mainlobe. The 3 dB beam width on all three beams
. . -~ - - ..... ~. ~
is approximately 2.7 degrees wide. .... ;... ;: _:. ~
Knowledge of these beam patterns is essential in ---· -

evaluating the performance of the FLAR during __ , . _ -.~.-: /:·_,_.::4--'i~,-',.:f.'·'/:·-;.._,-•..-,___
roadway testing. Antenna sidelobe levels can
significantly affect the performance of the sensor.
For example, a 30 dBsm target azimuthally located
within the sidelobe of the left beam would be
interpreted by the sensor as a 15 to 18 dBsm target Right Beam· l8°/D1v
located in the mainlobe of the left antenna. IOdB/D1v
Taking this issue a step further, a large target

located outside the 3 dB point of the center beam
(i.e., outside the road lane) could appear to be a
somewhat smaller target located inside the road lane. ., ,. ·...."'
Several of the roadway tests in this program are

designed to address these issues. Using the typical
3 dB point specification, the 3-antenna approach
provides the FLAR with an approximately 8.3 degree
azimuth field of view. 18°/Div
4.4.2 Range Accuracy Figure 4-7. FLAR Beam Patterns
The range tests are a set of static tests designed to

measure the absolute accuracy of the FLAR sensor. Targets were placed at known distances and data
was collected for analysis using ERIM-developed processing software (in other words, only the raw
radar signal was being considered, to avoid evaluating TRW's particular processing algorithms). The
tests were divided into two distinct sets: (1) Far Range Tests and (2) Near Range Tests. This section
will discuss the results from both sets and relate the findings to expectations for other automotive radars.
4-8
4.4.2.1 Far Range Tests (10 to 100 meters}
Data for these tests was collected by placing a corner reflector at 10 meter incremt?nts from 10 to
100 meters from the FLAR sensor. Individual tests were mn using a 10 dBsm and 20 dBsm target to
evaluate correlation between the results.
Figure 4-8 shows the results for the 20 dBsm and 10 dBsm corner reflectors. The solid line
represents the mean detected distance and the dotted lines show one standard deviation from the mean.
The dot-dashed line shows the distance reported by the FLAR sensor (which utilizes the TRW processing
algorithms).
20 dBsm Comer Reflector Range Test 10 dBsm Comer Reflector Range Test
4,---,--..--~--,-----.---,--.--....,....--, 2,----,----,---,---.--~---,--...----,
1.8
35
16
3
14
- --- -::/
~
,7
e
,,.- :, . ../ • - .. -:.✓•
,,.,
_____
/ ...... ' ,
w15 .,,· /~ /.--

. _/ .,-
_,,,,
~
,A!j; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "
04
05
02
0 •
10 20
~J
30
- .l
40
-
50
I
60
_ --l
70
• ~..1. _ • I
80 90 ~o - ,s ·20 ... 2s·· -

3°0 ---35- 40 45 50
Distance (Meters) Distance (Meters)
Figure 4-8. Comer Reflector Range Test Results
The figures show both a nonzero slope and a DC offset. The DC offset is an unaccounted for static
error in the either the FLAR sensor or the test setup/analysis routine. The slope is due to a chirp rate
discrepancy. That is, the chirp rate is not really what the specification says it is. Figure 4-9 shows how a
discrepancy in the chirp rate can lead to an error in the reported target range. The vertical lines
(Actual/Theoretical Dechirped Frequency) correspond to the sine wave created when the sensor dechirps
the return from the target. The frequency of the dechirped sine wave is:
dy
f=-
c
where f is the frequency of the dechirped sine wave

d is the distance from the sensor in meters
yis the FL.AR sensor chirp rate in MHz/µs
c is the speed of light in meters/µs
For a given chirp rate there is a unique frequency, for every range. However, if the chirp rate changes,
then the one-to-one correspondence between range and frequency also changes.
4-9
Frequency
, Acrual XIDlt Clurp

,,
Theoreucal Xm11 Chirp
Time
L T:irget .I
(Rang•,
Figure 4-9. Effect of Chirp Rate Error
Using the actual measurements taken in these tests, a true chirp rate was calculated using information
from Figure 4-8 as follows. The actual method used was to fit a line to the mean value data on
Figure 4-8 and use information from that line to calculate the new values.
Let
_Jc
d1-
r
d = Jc
2 y+..6.y
where d 1 is the assumed distance using the TRW numbers
d2 is the measured distance (from Figure 4-10)
f is the frequency of the dechirped sine wave
c is the speed of light
r is the chirp rate
..1ris the unknown difference in chirp rate to be calculated
The figure shows the error term obtained by subtracting d 1 from d2 • That is, the theoretical chirp rate
value was used to calculate the distance given the sine wave data. Therefore the range dependent error
(known because the actual distance was measured during the experiment) was caused by using the wrong
chirp rate. In equation form the distance error is:
Jc Jc
lld =d2 -dl = - -
r r+b.r
Solving this equation for ..1y gives the following:
-r2
lly = Jc
r -lld
-
4-10
where r= 3.04878 MHz/µS
c = 300 rn/µS
f is chosen arbitrarily
Mis chosen from the best fit line derived from Figure 4-9, given/
Adding in this correction to the chirp rate results in a range error profile that is nearly flat. However
there is still a static offset that has to be removed. This was accomplished by noting the y intercept point
from the line fit procedure during the chirp calculations. Applying both corrections and re-running the
Matlab analysis software yielded the results shown in Figure 4-10. As expected the error was zero mean
with a standard deviation proportional to range. The same correction coefficients were then applied to
the results from the 10 dBsm corner reflectors; if the error was an effect of the sensor then correction
coefficients should work for all test setups. The new chirp rate and offset values were:
Y••w= 3.09319 MHz/µs (Compared to 3.04878 theoretical)
Static Offset= 0.633727 Meters
The results of using these new correction values in the data processing is shown in Figure 4-10 for
the 20 dBsm and IO dBsm reflectors. As expected the range errors now had a zero mean with a standard
deviation proportional to range. Since the error was attributed to a chirp rate discrepancy, the corrections
were expected to work for all test set-ups. In fact, this proved to be the case, as a comparison of the first
50 meters of the 20 dBsm range test was almost identical to the 10 dBsm range tests. (Note that the
10 dBsm target was not detectable beyond the 50 meter mark.) Therefore, the new chirp rate
parameter and offset were be used throughout the program.
20 dBsm Comer Reflector Range Test Corrected 10 dBsm Comer Reflector Range Test Corrected
2 ,..---,---,,----,---,--,--,---,....---.---.....--,
1.5 04 ,,,----
/
/ 02
"§"
g., 0
6
' w
e.02
-04
.1
-15 -06
-08...._~....----....-...._-....-_._....-_.__--,....___,
~ ~ ~ • ~ 00 W M 00 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Distance (Meters) Distance (Meters)
Figure 4-10. Corrected Corner Reflector Range Test Results
In summary, the FLAR sensor showed both a static offset and a range dependent error. These errors
can be corrected by calibrating the sensor using radar range measurements to calculate two correction
coefficients. In addition, the sensor shows an increase in reported range variations as the range to the
target increases. The following section on range resolution provides a detailed discussion on the effects
of transmit and receive signal phase errors. These can result in a greater variation of reported target range
as the actual range to the target increases. ·
The actual results of this test are specific to the TRW FLAR sensor. However, it is likely that the
'offset' and 'linear' errors discussed in this section will occur in other radars designed for automotive
applications. The methodology for correcting these errors is a calibration process which will determine:
4-11
1. Variable signal delays through the radar components, which result in offset errors.
2. Variations (from spec) in the transmit signal FM modulation (Chirp Rate), which results in linear
range errors.
The correction of values resulting from such a calibration process can be implemented in the sensor's
processing algorithms and require no "fine-tuning" of the hardware. With appropriate instrumentation,
this process can be substantially automated.
The magnitude of the offset and linear errors will be dependent on the quality of the components
used in the system. Therefore, cost versus performance versus required calibration effort trade-offs will
have to be correctly evaluated for production of automotive radar sensors. For example, a common
approach to creating a linear frequency modulated signal (i.e., a chirp) is to drive a voltage-controlled
oscillator (VCO) with a voltage ramp. The quality (linearity, spectral purity, etc.) of the VCO output
signal is proportional to the component cost. Therefore, it is critical that automotive radar design
engineers understand the overall radar system performance implications on a component by component
basis.
Besides considering the absolute magnitude of the offset and linear ranging errors, the system
designer must evaluate a particular system's sensitivity to such errors. This sensitivity evaluation must
include the radar processing and threat assessment algorithms employed by the system. For example, a
system employing range differentiation to determine range rate (as opposed to Doppler processing) will
be highly sensitive to the variations in the range reported by the FLAR sensor in these tests.
4.4.2.2 Near Range Tests (0 to 1 O meters)
This next set of tests was aimed at evaluating performance as targets approached the near-field
antenna range. It also demonstrates the effects of a physically small target close to the FLAR' s two-
antenna bistatic arrangement. A bistatic arrangement refers to the fact that the FLAR uses physically
separate transmit and receive antennas (some radars use a duplexor to allow a single antenna to function
for both transmit and receive).
The issue of near-field versus far-field radar measurements was discussed in Section 3 with regard to
the radar cross-section measurements. For these near-range tests, the near-field issues must be
considered. In the near field the antenna beam pattern can be assumed to be the same shape as the
antenna aperture. The space around an antenna is divided into three regions, the reactive near-field
region, the radiating near-field region, and the radiating far-field region. The boundaries between these
regions are dependent on the antenna design. However certain criteria are generally used to denote the
boundaries between the regions. The reactive near-field region ends at a distance M21t from the antenna,
where A is the transmitted wavelength. The commonly used definition for the boundary between the
near-field and far-field regions is:
2D 2
R=-
A
where R is the boundary distance from the antenna
D is the largest aperture dimension
A. is the transmitted wavelength
For the FLAR antenna the reactive near-field region is approximately 0.5 mm. This battery of tests
never operated in that region. The radiating near-field region extends out to approximately 3 meters.
4-12
The FLAR collection system was set up in the ERIM highbay facility. A piece of radar absorbing
material was placed between the sensor and the far wall in order to eliminate undesired returns. A
10 dBsm comer reflector was placed in front of the sensor at a range of 10 meters and-a set of radar
pulses was collected. The reflector was moved one meter closer, and the process was repeated, until the
reflector was 1 meter from the sensor. The range data was analyzed using the same analysis routines
described the previous section.
Processing of the various data sets resulted in the plots shown in Figure 4-11. The solid line
represents the mean detected distance and the dotted lines show one standard deviation from the mean.
The dot-dashed line shows the distance reported by the FLAR sensor (which utilizes the TRW processing
algorithms). Note that the static offset and chirp rate corrections determined in the far range tests (see
discussion above) were employed while processing the near-range data sets.
1OdBsm Comer Reflector Near Range Test

25
15
*
-.;;
;;_ 1
\
e
UJ
05
4 6 8 10
Distance (Meters)
Figure 4-11. 1O dBsm Figure 4-12. 10 dBsm at 1 Meter
The plot indicates that the FLAR accurately measured the target's range until the target was placed
closer than 2 meters. The measurement taken at 1 meter shows a significant error in the ERIM processed
data (i.e., the raw radar signal); the error is extreme for the TRW processed data.
A single return pulse for the 1 meter distance is shown in Figure 4-12. The figure shows two distinct
peaks, one at the target distance and one at roughly twice the distance. The FLAR sensor reported the
ghost target (at the further distance) as the real target and ignored the real target. The data shows that the
target was detected at the appropriate range. The FLAR sensor software for some reason chooses to
detect only the ghost target.
4-13
Figure 4-13 shows a plot of 100 consecutive
pulses from the FLAR sensor. The second “ghost”
target is always present. The second target is
caused by one of three effects. First, it could be
caused by too much power reflecting back to the
FLAR sensor. This could make the RF front end
saturate, causing the circuit to operate in the
nonlinear region. Second, it could be caused by
energy reflecting back into the transmitter, which
would also cause the circuits to act in an
unpredictable fashion. Third, the target may be an
effect of multipath reflections. This would be a
case where the radar bounces off the target, then the
vehicle, then the target again. Figure 4-1 3. FLAR Frequency Response to Comer
Due to ERIM’s limited access to the TRW at 1 Meter
hardware and processing algorithms, the cause of
the double peaks in the radar data could not be experimentally determined.
In summary, the FLAR sensor does not operate reliably at ranges less than 1 meter. The error can
cause a target to appear farther away than it really is. This could have disastrous consequences in real
world intelligent cruise control or collision avoidance situations.
4.4.3 Range Resolution

The ability to separate signal returns into reflections from distinct targets or objects is described by a
radar’s range resolution specification. The TRW FLAR has a stated range resolution of 0.5 meters.
The theoretical range resolution of a chirped radar system is given by the following equation:
C
Pr = 2B
where pr is the range resolution in meters
C is the speed of light: 3 * 108 m/s
B is the processed bandwidth
The theoretical resolution of the FLAR system, using the documented bandwidth of 375 MHz, is
0.4 meters.
A typical way of measuring the resolution of a radar system is to measure the IPR 3 dB beam width
from a point target. This can be accomplished by using any of the range data collected for the range
accuracy tests. The effect of limited resolution is seen as a combining of the peak responses from two
physically close targets. This effect can be seen in Figure 4-14.
4-14
Two Targets That Are Not Resolved Two Targets Tllat Are Resolved
o~---~-----~
I l
-5 I \ -5
-10
-30
-35
-40 -45
-50 .____ _..___ _,___ _,__;__.__ __.

20 40 60 60 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
Frequency Frequency
Figure 4-14. Effect of Limited Resolution
The resolution of the sensor system is degraded by nonlinearities in the transmitted chirp signal. If
these errors are static pulse-to-pulse then they can be r~moved either by predistorting the waveform (an
expensive alternative) or by post processing of the collected data. If the errors are not the same pulse-to-
pulse, the system performance can be only marginally improved by post processing. Correction requires
modification of the waveform generation circuit to remove the pulse-to-pulse instabilities.
Two approaches were used to characterize the FLAR range resolution. First was an analytical
approach to determine the IPR width of the FLAR' s dechirped signal; the second was a physical
experiment using two displaced comer reflectors located within the FLAR' s field of view.
Analytical Approach
Since the system uses a dechirped approach, only the difference of the phase error between the two
chirps is available for study. This is shown in the following discussion.
The phase of a single transmitted chirp is given by:
where y is the chirp rate in MHz/microsecond,

fo is the initial starting frequency, and
~Jt) is the unknown phase error on the chirp waveform
(t) denotes a function of time (in microseconds).
Some time later the same signal is received from a target in the scene. The received signal will be a
duplicate of the transmitted one, delayed by a time equal to the two-way propagation delay to the target.
This assumes a non-moving target and non-moving sensor. The receive phase is given by:
4-15
where ,Dis the time delay (two-way) from the target, and
[t] denotes straight multiplication.
After dechirping the phase of the receive signal is:
The first term is the linear phase component of the received sine wave. The second term is a phase
delay equal to the round-trip time to the target. The final two terms make up the difference of the phase
error.
The plots in Figures 4-15 summarize the analytical results. The figure shows that the 3 dB width of
the IPR for a 10 dBsm target located 10 meters from the radar is very close to the theoretical value and
within TRW's stated specification. However, there is a substantial degradation in performance for a the
same target located 40 meters from the radar.
••,!-------,,=-,--",,:------'~=----,,~=---,oo=----,,.~,-------,;~,
Cl~(Mtlt'SJ
·ii
---.:-~····- : 1 ·11 -~--. - =~~-.-~:~: \·- .· /1
., 10 10s 11 n s ·z !!!l 395 40 -10~ .:, A~s
D'1Ulrlc• (Mllffll OSl:Zll'ft IMINC'S)
Target at 10 meters Target at 40 meters
Figure 4-15. Performance With a Single 10 dBsm Target
As the target moves away from the sensor, the main beam starts to broaden as it is corrupted by
nonlinearities in the FLAR. The performance degradation is similar to a synthetic aperture radar (SAR)
problem ERIM encountered in the early 1980's and is caused by phase errors in the transmitted chirp. At
near ranges the errors are small, but as the range increases the error becomes more noticeable.
In the case of the FLAR sensor, the phase errors causing the degraded IPR response were found to be
of two different types. First, there is a quadratic phase error caused in part by waveguide dispersion.
That is, the waveguide does not have constant phase characteristics over the bandwidth of the transmitted
chirp. It could also be caused, in part, by other circuits with nonlinear phase characteristics. However
there was no access to the circuit during this test so it is impossible to determine exactly where the error
is being introduced.
The quadratic error causes a broadening of the mainlobe of the IPR, which decreases the system
resolution. However, it does not explain the mainlobe corruption in Figure 4-18. The corruption
resembles a sinusoidal phase error of many cycles per transmit pulse. A thorough signal analysis
indicates that the transmitted signal is being distorted by a roughly 40 KHz sinewave within the radar.
A test sine wave was created and a sinusoidal phase error of 40 KHz was added to demonstrate the
effects of sinusoidal phase error on a pure tone. The results, along with an actual FLAR sensor return,
are shown in Figure 4-16. The middle plot of Figure 4-16 and the right plot are very similar in that they
4-16
have a mainlobe with very high sidelobe levels. Also of note is the asymmetry around the mainlobe.
Both plots show a similar asymmetry, with the right side (far range) falling off faster than the left side
(near range).
No Phase Error Sinusoidal Phase Error Actual FLAR Return

o--~--~ o .i'l
-5
-10
-5
-10
-5
/V~
-15 -15
-10
/V 11 -
I iv1
-20 -20 -15
-25 -25 \I\

-20
-30 -30 II
-25
-35 -35
-40 -30
200 250 300 90 100 110
Figure 4-16. Effects of Sinusoidal Phase Error
Sinusoidal phase errors are worse at far ranges than they are at near ranges. This is because the
dechirping process shows the phase errors as the difference between the transmitted and received error.
Two sine waves with little phase difference (i.e., a small time delay with respect to their period) subtract
leaving a small residual. As the phase difference increases the difference becomes larger. When the
errors are out of phase the difference can actually be larger than the original phase error (constructive
interference).
It is this sinusoidal error within the FLAR transmit chirp which causes the range accuracy
deviations identified in the range accuracy tests discussed above.
With this analytical knowledge, the physical tests of FLAR range resolution performance were
performed at near ranges to avoid the errors induced by the sinusoidal distortion.
Empirical Approach
This test used data previously collected for the range accuracy tests. However, the analysis differed.
Oney one set of six pulses was used. This data was heavily up-sampled by zero padding the FFf to
32768 (32K) points. This allowed an accurate measurement of the 3 dB IPR width.
A resolution demo was performed in the ERIM highbay facility using two similar comer reflectors
placed close together. The corners were placed approximately 5 meters from the FLAR sensor. The
corners were mounted on a low reflectance (cardboard) flat plate marked off in 0.1 meter increments.
The flat plate was mounted on a 0.7112 meter (28 inch) high Styrofoam pillar. The comers were
4-17
initially set at a distance of 0.6 meters and moved in a tenth of a meter every collection thereafter. The
comer reflectors were nominally sized to be 11.6 dBsm.
In these tests, the sensor was able to reliably resolve two similar sized objects placed more than
0.6 meters apart. At relative distances less than 0.6 meters, the sensor would sometimes resolve them
and sometimes not. This matches fairly well with the theoretical analysis discussed above.
With regard to a generic automotive radar, the range resolution is important, as it allows the system
to track and identify multiple objects. As shown, the quality of the transmit signal plays a major role in
the range resolution performance of the radar. This of course relates back to the cost-performance trade-
off which must be made by system developers in implementing a specific radar sensor design.
4.4.4 Baseline IF Signal Characteristics

The last baseline characteristic of interest in this program is the typical range profile produced by the
FLAR when mounted on the ERIM TBV and presented with an “empty” roadway environment. The
“empty” roadway environment refers to being on a typical roadway without any other vehicles or objects
to produce a return.
Figures 4- 17 and 4-18 show range profile plots for 160 frames of radar data collected on an empty
roadway. Figure 4-17 shows the range profile with the return levels on the y-axis and the corresponding
range on the x-axis. Each profile from the 160 frames is overlayed on this plot. Figure 4-18 is a similar
plot, except that instead of overlaying the profiles from each frame, a third dimension on the plot is used
to position the frames side-by-side to produce a “time-history” of the returns. Both of these plots were
made from the same set of data.
970301b Records 20 to 180 Baseline for Bounce Test - 970301b

OJJ7
0.06 -
0.05 .
s;:-OIE
0.04 . s.!!!
~ ~004
s
l!!o.03
C
:i
~002
0
a
100 12) 140

Pulses (Time)
Distance (meters)
Figure 4-20. Two-Dimensional Range Profile Figure 4-21. Three-Dimensional “Time History”
Plot Range Profile Plot
The FLAR exhibits a clear range profile characteristic which has been observed throughout the
evaluation of the unit. First is the very-near-range return which is significantly above the noise floor of
the sensor. This near-range return is attributed to leak-through of the transmit signal into the receiver
circuitry. While this “return” is well above the noise floor, it does not compete with the return levels
from any significantly sized objects. The TRW processing algorithm does not recognize this return as a
target.
4-18
The second characteristic is the “‘hump” which appears at ranges between approximately 30 to
45 meters. Initially, this hump was attributed to the range at which the antenna beam pattern intersected
with the roadway surface. However, “bounce tests” were found to have no effect on the characteristic
hump. Therefore, this hump is attributed to some distortion or response within the FLAR receiver
circuitry.
These baseline characteristics of the FUR IF signal were considered in the analysis of data
collected on the natural roadway.
4-19
5.0 MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
This section will present the results of testing designed to quantify the effects of various materials
and environmental conditions on FLAR performance. In these tests, the FLAR was being treated as a
“generic” 94 GHz radar sensor. That is to say that none of the TRW algorithms associated with the ACC
application were employed in arriving at these results.
The tests were conducted by carefully controlling the environment presented to the radar sensor and
recording the raw radar signals, to evaluate changes based on the environmental conditions. The tests are
divided into three sections: (1) Materials Testing, (2) Precipitation Testing, and (3) Contamination
Testing. The results are summarized below and described more completely in Appendix B.
5.1 MATERIALS TESTING

The materials testing experiments were designed to quantify the amount of attenuation experienced
by the radar signal when it is transmitted through various types of materials. This testing indicates the
types of materials which should be considered for the housing of an automotive radar. The testing also
identifies materials which the radar may have a difficult time detecting on the roadway.
The types of materials tested were:
l Plexiglas
l Windshield-type Glass
l Epoxy Glass
. Thin Cardboard
l TPO ( a flexible plastic commonly used in automobile bumpers/facia)
l 3/4" Plywood
l RAM (Radar Absorbing Material)
The testing procedure consisted of placing a 5dBsm comer reflector at approximately 20 meters from
the FLAR. Data was then collected as a sample of each material was placed between the FLAR and the
comer reflector. Appendix B provides a complete description of the testing procedures and analysis.
Also included in Appendix B is a brief explanation of the mechanisms which cause conductive and non-
conductive materials to reflect energy.
5.1.1 Results
Three effects were observed during the material obstruction tests: (1) target signal strength
attenuation, (2) direct reflection from the material being tested, and (3) creation of multipath returns.
Each of these effects are discussed below.
Attenuation
Table 5- 1 summarizes the attenuation results of the material tests. The return levels and AGC
settings for each collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to calculate the “AGC
adjusted voltage” values which were then compared to determine the attenuation levels. The “Baseline”
measurement was used as the reference for each attenuation calculation. Note that the attenuation levels
provided are for “two-way” propagation. In other words, the radar signal passed through the material
under test twice---once on transmission, and once after it was reflected off the target in the scene.
5-l
Table 5-1. Attenuation
Two-Way
Measured AGC AGCMag. AGC Power
Return Control Attenuation Adjusted Attenuation
Material Description Volts Setting (v) (dB) Return Volts (dB)
Baseline 0.458 4.154 -19.9034 1.4403 0.0

Clear Plexiglas 0.405 3.956 -5.9292 0.5698 8.1
Thin Cardboard 0.4 3.906 -3.6324 0.4930 9.3
Windshield Glass (15 degrees) 0.381 3.906 -3.6324 0.4696 9.7
Epoxy Glass 0.343 3.906 -3.6324 0.4228 10.6
Thick Cardboard (corrugated) 0.188 3.906 -3.6324 0.2317 15.9
TPO 0.17 3.906 -3.6324 0.2095 16.7
TPO (15 degrees) 0.163 3.906 -3.6324 0.2009 17.1
Plywood (0.75") 0.056 3.906 -3.6324 0.0690 26.4
RAM 0.05 3.906 -3.6324 0.0616 27.4
Figure 5-1 illustrates the relative attenuation levels listed in Table 5-1. The materials are listed from
lowest attenuation level to highest. Note that the RAM attenuation level represents the maximum
attenuation level for the given test set-up (e.g., size and distance of target). Returns from the reference
reflector placed in the scene were always observable in the radar data except for tests with the RAM.
Even in tests with the plywood as the obstructing material, the FLAR still detected the 5 dBsm reference
target at 20 meters.
Two-way Power Attenuation

{dB)
5.0
(/)
'E (/)
(/) -c 'c 0 ::E
..
(/)
<tl !t5 !t5
. . Q) a.. <(
<Il-
a, Cl
0 "§
C: 0
·-
.c: .c
"O
a>. 13
--
ig «i
.c C)
I- a:
i[
I- ..
!t5 X
0
t="E!t5 2...
0 C.
w
o.§_
Figure 5-1. Attenuation Levels
5-2
The two-way attenuation levels vary from 8.1 dB for the clear Plexiglas to over 17 dB for the TPO (a
plastic-type material commonly used for bumpers and facia styling) and over 26 dB for the plywood.
Reflections
In addition to attenuating the return levels from the reference reflector, many of the materials
produced a direct radar signal return (i.e., the material reflected the radar energy). The materials
producing the largest reflections were the windshield glass and TPO materials. Note that these reflection
levels were highly dependent upon the orientation between the FLAR and the material sample. The plots
included in Appendix B indicate that these reflection levels can be nearly equal to the return level from
the reference reflector. Of course the material samples were at a much closer range than the reference
reflector-l to 2 meters for the material samples versus 20 meters for the reference reflector.
Much lower direct reflections were observed from the cardboard, Plexiglas and plywood materials.
While these reflections were clearly evident, they were not much above the noise floor of the FLAR.
Multipath
In addition to the reflections and signal attenuation, several of the material samples were observed to
produce multipath returns from the reference reflector. Figure 5-2 is a diagram showing how an
obstructing material can cause a multipath return. Some level of energy is refracted by the material and
directed along an indirect path to the target. Since the distance the radar signal must travel the indirect
path is longer than that along the direct path, the resulting range reading from the radar will be greater
than the actual direct range to the target.
Material
Sample
Target
Direct
Reflection
Multipath
''
' Reflection _,-
' ....
' .... -- ,-
Figure 5-2. Multipath Reflection
Figure 5-3 shows the radar returns collected with a TPO material sample oriented 15 degrees off
vertical. The multipath returns from the reference reflector are clearly evident. These effects were also
observed for other materials tested. The effect of this phenomenon is that the peak level return from the
reference reflector is decreased and false returns are produced. See the plots in Appendix B for more
multipath examples.
5-3
TPO 15 Degrees: 960709e.rdf Records 1 to
0
0.1
Multipath
0.1
Returns
0.1
0.1
01
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Range
Figure 5-3. Multipath Returns From TPO Material at 15 Degree incident Angle
5.1.2 Conclusions
The tests discussed in this section have evaluated the effects of various materials on the target return
levels for a 94 GHz radar. Figure 5-l summarizes the test results. The power attenuation level is
provided for each material tested. Again, these attenuation levels correspond to the effects on a 94 GHz
radar, but similar results can be expected at 77 GHz. Key observations of the test include:
l All materials tested allowed some portion of the radar signal to pass through the material and
attenuated the radar signal to some degree.
l Except for the RAM material, the return from the reference reflector was still observable.
. Some materials reflected observable energy at certain orientations.
l Some materials produced multipath returns at certain orientations.
For styling, automotive radars will have to be integrated into the overall vehicle structure. This
means the radar antennas will most likely be covered by some type of material. Knowledge of the
absorption, transmitivity, and reflection characteristics of various materials is therefore critical to the
successful implementation of automotive radar sensors.
These materials tests identify issues which must be addressed in order to successfully integrate a
radar into the automobile. First, if the radar antennas are to be concealed by some material, the signal
attenuation resulting from the chosen material must be compensated for to maintain the required radar
sensitivity. Increasing the transmit power of the radar is au easy solution which may, however, have
serious cost implications. Therefore, the concealing material must be carefully selected. Typically
suggested locations for automotive radars would place the sensors either behind the plastic material of
the front facia or grill, or behind the glass of the windshield or headlights.
The quantitative data from these tests (see Figure 5-1) indicate that placing the sensor behind a
slanted windshield may produce less attenuation than placing it behind TPO-type plastic. An even better
solution is to place it behind clear Plexiglas. Another option is to utilize specially fabricated material
which exhibits very low attenuation; however, this could add cost to the system implementation.
In orienting the radar with respect to a concealing material, care must be taken not to produce a
significant direct reflection which may saturate the radar receiver and “blind” it to other objects. Also,
5-4
and perhaps more serious from a threat assessment algorithm perspective, is the danger of having a
concealing material generate numerous multipath returns. This could potentially place a large burden on
the sensor processing electronics in terms of having to generate track files for objects which do not
actually exist in the scene. Some level of multipath is inevitable, due to the complexity of the roadway
environment, but inappropriately choosing and orienting a material in front of the radar sensor could
severely compound the problem.
Another important issue regarding the attenuation characteristics of materials concerns accurately
reporting the range to non-metal roadway targets. As vehicle manufacturers continue to reduce weights,
the use of non-conductive plastic materials is expected to increase. As the results of these material tests
indicate, the use of non-conductive materials can severely decrease the overall radar cross-section of the
vehicle.
5.2 PRECIPITATION TESTS

The purpose of these precipitation tests was to evaluate the effects of snow, rain, and fog on the
performance of the FLAR sensor. Since in automotive applications, the role of the radar would be to
enhance the human’s ability to perform during inclement weather, the sensor’s performance capability
under various weather conditions is critical to evaluate.
Both natural and simulated precipitation tests were conducted to arrive at the results discussed
below. The snow data was derived from natural snow precipitation only. The fog data was collected
using an artificial fog machine. The rain data was collected using both natural rain and rain from a high-
pressure washer to allow the precipitation rate to be more controlled.
5.2.1 Results
In general, the precipitation tested had little effect on the FLAR’s performance. In particular, the
precipitation particles were not found to produce any significant returns to the FLAR and the attenuation
levels were very small.
Table 5-2 shows the quantitative summary of the tests (see Appendix B for details). The return
levels and AGC settings for each collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to
calculate the "AGC adjusted voltage” values which were then compared to determine the attenuation
levels. The “Baseline” for each collection was used as the reference for each attenuation calculation.
Note that the attenuation levels provided are for “two-way” propagation. In other words, the radar signal
passed through the precipitation-filled atmospheric medium twice-once on transmission, and once after
it was reflected off the target in the scene.
Figure 5-4 illustrates the attenuation levels produced from the various levels and types of
precipitation. These attenuation levels have been normalized to 10 meter ranges. These values are not
considered substantial; return levels from the FLAR during static collections with precision reference
reflectors in a controlled environment have been observed to fluctuate by values approaching these.
Note that negative attenuation levels indicate that the peak return from the target in the scene actually
increased. This could be due to the wet target causing more of the radar energy to ‘be directed back in the
direction of the FLAR, or due to the wet ground between the radar and the target causing a higher level
of multipath returns.
5-5
Table 5-2. Precipitation Test Results
AGC Two-Way Two-Way
Target Measured AGC AGCMag. Adjusted Power Power
Precipitation Range Return Control Attenuation Return Attenuation Attenuation
Description (m) Volts Setting (v) {dB) Volts (dB) (dB/lOm)
Light Rain 13 0.492 3.906 -3.6324 0.6064 -0.4 -0.29

Moderate Rain 13 0.441 3.906 -3.6324 0.5436 0.6 0.44
Heavy Rain 13 0.421 3.906 -3.6324 0.5189 1.0 0.75
Moderate Snow 22 0.083 3.906 -3.6324 0.1023 -0.7 -0.30
Heavy Snow 22 0.085 3.906 -3.6324 0.1048 -0.9 -0.39
Fog 1 3 0.366 3.906 -3.6324 0.4511 0.3 1.05
Fog2 3 0.375 3.906 -3.6324 0.4622 0.1 0.35
Two-way
Power
Attenuation
(dB/10m)
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40 EITwo-way
Power
0.20
Attenuation
0.00 (dB/10m)
-0.20
-0.40
.z__
- C:
C) al
:::iCI:
Figure 5-4. Precipitation Attenuation Levels
5.2.2 Conclusions
The primary conclusion of this test is that the FLAR performance was not significantly affected by
the various levels and types of precipitation tested. In particular, the precipitation did not produce any
observable return levels in the FLAR IF signal, and the attenuation levels were very low. However, the
combination of a low RCS target at a far range during heavy rates of precipitation ( or heavy fog) could
cause a problem for an automotive radar.
The results achieved during this testing correlate well with those in the open literature. There are
several papers which have been published on the attenuation of high frequency communication systems
as a result of precipitation (see Appendix B). In general, both theoretical and empirical attenuation
levels are stated to be about 10 dB per kilometer (one-way). Relating the information obtained in the
5-6
open literature to the operating ranges for automotive radars, one could expect power attenuation levels
on the order of 1 to 3 dB at 100 meter ranges.
The measurements conducted as part of this program indicate that the actual attenuation levels may
be somewhat higher than the 1 to 3 dB values mentioned above. More practical values could range from
2 to 10 dB of power loss at 100 meter ranges. Of course these values are highly dependent upon the rate
of precipitation and also particulate size. As the particulate size approaches 1/4 wavelength of the radar
frequency, the particulate will begin acting as an antenna.
In practical terms, the most important outcome of this test was the verification that the FLAR was
capable of detecting targets within its field-of-view in the presence of significant precipitation. Except
for the light rain collections, the target itself was visually obscured from the FLAR’s location. During
the heavy rain and fog tests, the target was often totally obscured. Despite the visual obscuration, return
levels from the target were easily observed in the raw radar signal. These observations provide empirical
support to those who cite radar’s all-weather performance advantage over infrared or optical sensors for
automotive applications.
The surprising phenomenon observed during the testing was the occasional increase in return levels
in the presence of precipitation. This was observed during several collections. While the increase was
not significant, it was measurable. Possible explanations for this phenomenon are:
l As the precipitation fell, the ground between the radar and the target became wet and a larger
multipath return. Theoretically, enhanced multipath returns can increase actual target returns
over 10 dB given a particular geometry.
l As the precipitation particles landed in the target, they caused an increase in the non-specular
returns due to increased refraction and energy scattering. For tests conducted with reference
reflectors, the increase may have come from particles landing on the styrofoam support pedestal.
5.3 CONTAMINATION TESTS

The purpose of these contamination tests was to evaluate how dirt, moisture, and snow would affect
the FLAR’s performance. The “contamination” could occur either at the target location or at the sensor.
For example, the target itself would be considered “contaminated” if it were snow covered, or the sensor
could be “contaminated” if its antennas were covered with mud.
The underlying concern for automotive applications is that dirt or other contaminants covering either
the target or the sensor itself could severely inhibit the sensor’s operation. For example, some laser
sensors have had problems tracking targets contaminated with a thick film of dirt.
To evaluate the effect of contaminants on the FLAR, the following contamination scenarios were
tested:
l Vehicle target contaminated with snow: In this scenario, the rear portion of the target vehicle (a
Pontiac Sunbird) was partially (about 50 percent) covered with fairly dry snow.
l Vehicle target contaminated with water: In this scenario, the target vehicle (a small pick-up
truck) was sprayed with water from a hose. Care was taken to perform the baseline test with
already wet ground to isolate the vehicle contamination from multipath effects.
l FLAP sensor contaminated with snow: This scenario had approximately 1 inch of snow densely
packed on the face of the FLAR sensor.
l FLAB sensor contaminated with semi-dry mud: The mud tests were divided into two levels of
contamination- The first level had the glass plate covered with mud, but was still visually
translucent. The second level had the glass plate covered with thick mud so that it was visually
opaque. This second level is referred to in the tests as “very muddy.”
5-7
5.3.1 Results
The results of the contamination tests were not what was intuitively expected. Therefore, several
data sets were collected/analyzed for each type of test and the results were found to be consistent.
Table 5-3 shows the quantitative summary of the tests. The return levels and AGC settings for each
collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to calculate the “AGC adjusted voltage”
values which are then compared to determine the attenuation levels. The “Baseline” for each collection
was used as the reference for each attenuation calculation. Note that the attenuation levels provided are
for “two-way” propagation.
Table 5-3. Contamination Test Summary

AGC Two-Way
AGC AGCMag. Adjusted Power
Measured Return Control Attenuation Return Attenuation
Material Description Volts Setting(v) (dB) Volts (dB)
Water on Truck 0.514 3.906 -3.632 0.634 -0.5

Snow on Car 0.09 3.906 -3.632 0.111 -1.2
Translucent Mud at Sensor 0.197 3.906 -3.632 0.243 -0.7
Opaque Mud at Sensor 0.306 3.906 -3.632 0.377 -4.5
Snow Covered Sensor 0.02 3.906 -3.632 0.025 11.8
Figure 5-5 illustrates the attenuation levels produced from the various types of contamination.
Negative attenuation levels indicate that the peak return from the target in the scene actually increased.
Two-way
Power
Attenuation
(dB)
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
BTwo-way
2.0 Power
0.0 Attenuation
-2.0 (dB)
-4.0
-6.0
C: C: CD CD - ,.. "t:I ...
O,:;:. 0 0 -a, ... ::J a, 0 ;: ~ 0
::, "ti 0
... 0 ;: ffl uj ::, CD
CT "t:I a,
«s::, C: 0 CD a,
C: > C
CD ::J
oo g:: ~ en oen
s:ai I-... C:
en
~:: 5i
... -en
I- C:
O CD
Figure 5-5. Contamination Attenuation Levels
The increases in peak return levels observed in the contaminated vehicle test results correlate with
some of the observations made during the precipitation tests. In these cases, a possible explanation is
5-8
that the particulate contamination on the vehicle may be enhancing the return level by creating more
scattering centers through refraction of the radar energy. See Appendix B for a detailed explanation of
this hypothesis.
Results from the contaminated sensor test using semi-dry mud were similar to the contaminated
target results. These tests again resulted in ‘negative’ attenuation, or an observed gain in peak return
level. In analyzing the range profiles for the mud contamination tests, it was observed that the
contaminated glass plate itself did not reflect energy back to the FLAR. The only difference between the
baseline and contamination tests was the peak return level from the reference reflector. A potential cause
for this phenomenon is discussed in Appendix B.
Finally, the result of the test in which the FLAR sensor was “caked” with 1 inch of wet snow
indicates that the snow did in fact inhibit the sensor from detecting the reference target. Note that the
11 dB signal attenuation caused the reference target return to drop below the system noise level (i.e., the
target was not observable).
Special Note: Although these tests indicate a snow-covered vehicle does not pose a detection
problem for the radar, the reader should be aware that these results correspond to the specific
contamination scenario presented to the FLAR. This scenario was fairly “dry” snow over 50 percent of
the rear section of a mid-sized car. We would expect that the heavy “wet” snow which totally covers a
vehicle could cause serious detection problems for radar system.
5.3.2 Conclusions
The analyses of the contamination tests have identified some phenomena which were unanticipated.
The presence of contamination particulates at both the target and sensor have been observed to cause an
increase in the peak return from reference targets in the FLAR’s field of view. A potential mechanism
for creating this phenomenon is presented in Appendix B. However, it should be noted that this
hypothesis has not been thoroughly tested. More research into the phenomenon is required. While the
measurement equipment and procedures have been reviewed, the limited access to the FLAR electronics
has severely limited our ability to rule out a sensor specific response to the contamination.
The primary conclusion from these tests is that both target and sensor contamination from rain,
snow, and mud may cause return levels from targets in the scene to actually increase. This would of
course add to the robustness of the automotive radar in detecting objects at non-specular aspect angles.
However, the mechanism causing this phenomena needs to be more clearly understood.
Conversely, the snow-covered sensor tests indicate that certain contaminants could also cause severe
degradation in sensor performance to the point of missing significant targets within the scene.
5-9
6.0 ROADWAY TESTS
The Roadway Tests were conducted in both structured (on test tracks) and unstructured (on
freeways) settings. These tests were focused on the sensing issues that might arise in the Adaptive
Cruise Control application. To support them a data acquisition and analysis system was developed and
upgraded when the prototype radar was upgraded (see Appendix C). In addition, a differential GPS
system was developed (see Appendix D) as a truthing tool which provided an independent measurement
of the distance between the host vehicle and roadway objects of interest. This system was demonstrated
at the 1995 Annual Meeting of ITS America, and at the AVCS Committee Meeting & Vehicle
Demonstrations held at the Transportation Research Center (TRC), Inc., East Liberty, Ohio in August,
1996. The structured tests (see Appendix E) were conducted at the TRC in October and November, 1996
in accordance with a test plan developed in cooperation with NHTSA. The detailed test results can be
found in Appendix F.
The primary purpose for these tests was to characterize the sensor’s measurement performance
capabilities in five major categories that are discussed separately in the following sections. Detecting
objects, vehicle background, moving or stationary, is a signal processing task that will be addressed from
the standpoint of examining the information available from this sensor for detection purposes.
This section will summarize the results and key observations of the structured and unstructured
roadway tests. These roadway tests have been grouped into five major categories. The reader should
refer to Appendices F and G for more detailed discussion of each of the specific tests.
6.1 BACKGROUND MEASUREMENTS

The issue addressed by these measurements is false alarms that could result from returns induced by
“background” objects which include vehicles parked on the roadside, roadside barriers, and vehicles in
adjacent lanes.
Table 6- 1 summarizes the results of the various tests which were designed to address the background
object/false alarm issue. The information in parentheses following the test title indicates the appendix
section in which the tests are discussed in detail. Also, details regarding the test configuration are
discussed in the test plan provided in Appendix E.
6-1
Table 6- 1. Background Measurements Results and Key Observations
Test Title Results and Key Observations
Vehicle Induced False While the FLARnever tracked the roadside vehicles returns from the roadside
Alarms--Straight vehicles were present in the raw radar data at ranges from 50 to 90 meters with
Roadway-Roadside Vehicle the FLAR center beam active. The low return levels (max +3 dBsm for a tractor
(F.1) trailer) are attributed to the orientation between the host and secondary vehicles
which causes the roadside vehicle to be illuminated by the low gain fringe of the
center beam’s mainlobe.
Vehicle Induced False Returns from adjacent lane vehicles were not evident with the FLARcenter beam
Alarms--Straight active. Returns in the raw radar data were observed with the left beam active. It
Roadway-Adjacent Lane was observed that with a tractor/trailer in the adjacent lane, returns were induced
Vehicle (F. 1) by scatterers on both the front and rear portions of the vehicle.
Vehicle Induced False Guard rails around the outside of a curve induced a characteristic return in the
Alarms-Curved radar as the host vehicle maneuvered through the turn. The returns from the
Roadway-Roadside Vehicle guard rail were significant and the FLAR occasionally “locked-on” to the rail for
(F-10) brief periods of time. Vehicles parked along the curved roadway caused brief
returns above those of the guard rail returns as the FLAR’s center beam scanned
across the vehicle. The level of return from the roadside vehicles were significant
and varied by type of vehicle. The FLAR processing never “locked on” to any of
the roadside vehicles.
Vehicle Induced False Vehicles located in the adjacent lane on a curved roadway were found to induce
Alarms--Curved returns in the raw radar data which are similar to those of a preceding vehicle in
Roadway-Adjacent Lane the same lane as the host vehicle on a straight roadway. This test scenario clearly
Vehicle (F. 10) indicates that to minimize false alarms, the radar must have some knowledge of
the host vehicle dynamics or geometry of the upcoming roadway.
Open Roadway Tests Bridge overpasses were found to induce substantial returns especially when the
issue of vehicle loading was addressed. Tests to evaluate the response to various
road surfaces resulted in no observable difference in backsound returns from
concrete, asphalt, or dirt roads. Guard rails and roadside signs were observed to
induce varying levels of return based on geometric orientation. Hills were found
to have little effect in terms of inducing signals in the raw radar data.
6.2 TEMPORAL CHANGES

The issue addressed by these measurements is the ability of the FLAR to respond to traffic changes
in terms of the sensor response time. Lead vehicle braking either the host or lead vehicle leaving the
lane, and cut-ins are all typical roadway events that must be accommodated by the radar sensor. To
provide sufficient time for threat assessment algorithm processing driver warning, and driver response,
the radar measurement processing latency should be minimized.
Table 6-2 summarizes the results of the various tests which were designed to address the temporal
change issue. The information in parentheses following the test title indicates the appendix section in
which the tests are discussed in detail. Also, details regarding the test configuration are discussed in the
test plan provided in Appendix E.
6-2
Table 6-2. Temporal Change Measurements Results and Key Observations
Braking Secondary From a system perspective, the FLAR performed-well: accurate tracking of
Vehicle--Straight Roadway lead vehicle maintained at 20 Hz update rate and the reported range error was
(F.2) consistently < +
+l meter. From a sensor perspective, the dynamics caused large
pulse-to-pulse signal return variations which approached 10 dB.
Intentional Lane The radar sensor raw data responded virtually instantaneously to
Changes--Straight Roadway environmental changes. As the host vehicle changed lanes, the returns from
(F.4) the in-lane vehicle did not end abruptly, but dissipated rapidly as the radar
beam boresight shifted during the lane change maneuver.
Tracking New Target During these tests, the FLAR tracking algorithm performed well. As the
Vehicle--Straight Roadway secondary vehicle changed Ianes, the switch from tracking one vehicle to the
(F.5) other was instantaneous and stable (i.e., no jitter between the tracking of the
two vehicles).
Tracking With Cut-In-Straight The results of these tests were much like those described in F-5 above. The
Roadway (F.6) reader is referred to the appendix for a discussion of near range cut-in
problems which can occur due to the radar’s limited field of view.
Open Roadway Tests Many temporal changes in medium to heavy traffic scenarios due to dynamic
maneuvers, oncoming traffic, and roadside objects were presented to the
FLAR. The radar sensor exhibited virtually instantaneous response to the
changing conditions, while the FLAR higher-level processing occasionally had
some acquisition and tracking latency for new targets. This latency was
generally well under 1 second. This illustrates the fact that from a system
perspective, the delay in reporting the range to targets and generating track
files for threat assessment is highly dependent on filtering and processing
algorithms employed.
6.3 RANGE CLUTTER

The issue addressed by these measurements is radar’s ability to discriminate between vehicles at
various ranges from the host vehicle when the vehicles have significantly different radar cross sections.
The vehicle furthest from the host vehicle represents range clutter relative to the vehicle immediately in
front of the host vehicle (i.e., the secondary vehicle), and could limit the radar’s ability to accurately
measure the range between the host vehicle and the secondary vehicle.
Table 6-3 summarizes the results of the various tests which were designed to address the range
clutter issue. The information in parentheses following the test title indicates the appendix section in
6-3
Table 6-3. Range Clutter Measurements Results and Key Observations
Strong Vehicle Clutter in The significant observation in this set of tests was that the EAR occasionally
Range-Straight Roadway lost track of a near range low RCS vehicle (motorcycle) due to the large clutter
(F-7) signal from a further range large RCS vehicle (truck). The FLAR was observed
to actually start tracking the further range vehicle. This could result in highly
undesirable consequences for the ACC application. The range clutter induced
errors can be caused by large differences in return levels and reduced radar
sensitivity from Automatic Gain Control (AGC) activity.
Open Roadway Tests While the open roadway tests presented the FLAR with a wide variety of traffic
scenarios, the FLAR was never observed to lose track of a preceding vehicle due
to range clutter returns. Geometries such as those created on the test track were
not encountered. This illustrates one of the problems in testing automotive
radars, namely, the roadway environment in which the radar must operate is
virtually unconstrained with regards to the multitude of geometries and objects
which can be encountered. Therefore, careful design and evaluation of
potentially problematic scenarios must be carried out under test rack conditions.
6.4 AZIMUTH CLUTTER

The issue addressed by these measurements is radar’s ability to discriminate between vehicles in
adjacent lanes relative to the host vehicle when the host vehicle is measuring the range to an in-lane
secondary vehicle. The vehicles in the adjacent lanesrepresent azimuth clutter to the host vehicle and
could limit the radar’s ability to accurately measure the range between the host vehicle and the secondary
vehicle. Depending on the nature of the measurement error, the higher-level processing in the ACC
system may not be able to reliably track the proper secondary vehicle.
Table 6-4 summarizes the results of the various tests which were designed to address the azimuth
clutter issue. The information in parentheses following the test title indicates the appendix section in
64
.
Table 6-4. Azimuth Clutter Measurements Results and Key Observations

Out-of-Lane Vehicle Tests conducted with the FLAR center beam activeresulted in no returns from
Clutter-Straight Roadway, the out-of-iane clutter vehicle. Tests conducted with the FLAR left beam active
Single Clutter Vehicle (F.3) resulted in low level retnrns from the out-of-lane clutter vehicle. These low level
returns did not result in a loss of track on the preceding in-lane vehicle.
Vehicle Clutter in These tests were run with only the FLAR center beam active. No returns from
Azimuth-Straight Roadway, the out-of-lane clutter vehicles were observed. It should be noted that in these
Multiple Clutter Vehicles tests, the target vehicle maximum range was approximately 50 meters. Higher
F. 8) would result in a wider center beam coverage area which might begin to
illuminate adjacent lanes at higher intensities.
Vehicle Clutter in Radar returns from both in-lane and adjacent lane vehicles were dependent upon
Azimuth-Curved Roadway the radius of roadway curvature, range to the vehicles, and boresight of the
(F. 12) active antenna. Results showed that instead of tracking the in-lane vehicle, the
FLAR tracked the vehicle in the outside lane under commonly encountered
geometries. Tests with the left and right FLAR antenna beams active illustrated
how “steering” the radar beam while negotiating a curve would enhance the
radar sensor’s performance with regards to tracking the in-lane vehicle.
Open Roadway Tests Heavier traffic scenarios actually resulted in few returns from azimuth clutter
due to occlusion and AGC sensitivity effects created by near range in-lane
objects (heavy traffic density). Tests in lower density traffic showed that
azimuth clutter (guard rails, signs, 2-lane oncoming traffic, etc.) cause significant
transient returns levels in the raw radar data. The FLAR ACC algorithm never
“locked-on” and tracked these returns, however, an algorithm designed for
collision avoidance or warning may have false alarm/missed detection problems
with these events. It should be noted that systems designed to ignore stationary
objects could filter many of these clutter returns out.
6.5 ROADWAY GEOMETRY

Roadway geometry stresses the radar’s ability to make range measurements because varying
roadway geometry essentially requires a wider radar field-of-view to accommodate the angular
variations between the host and secondary vehicles. Simply increasing the field-of-view will introduce
azimuthal clutter, and thus a basic design trade-off is introduced, that is, simultaneously accommodating
varying roadway and traffic conditions.
Table 6-5 summarizes the results of the various tests which were designed to address the roadway
geometry issue and its relationship to field-of-view requirements. The information in parentheses
following the test title indicates the appendix section in which the tests are discussed in detail. Also,
details regarding the test configuration are discussed in the test plan provided in Appendix E.
6-5
Table 6-5. Roadway Geometry Measurements Results and Key Observations
1Merging Traffic-Straight Roadway geometries associated with merging traffic lanes did NOT induce
1Roadway (F.9) returns within the FLAR sensor. For these tests, the FLAR field-of-view was
limited to 3 degrees in azimuth (i.e., the beamwidth of the center transmit
antenna). The reader is referred to Section 6.4 (“Azimuth Clutter”) for the
description of tests which address field-of-view issues for roadside vehicles.
Tracking through a Curve These test scenarios are probably the most pertinent to the field-of-view issue.
and Vehicle Clutter in These tests illustrated that the radar sensor field-of-view must be wider than
Azimuth-Curved Roadway 3 degrees to effectively track in-lane objects beyond a 20 meter range on a
(F.ll and F.12) typical roadway curvature. The reader should also refer to test scenario F. 10
(“Vehicle Induce False Alarms-Curved Roadway”) for a discussion on the
impact of guard rails around curves and the relationship with sensor field-of-
view.
Open Roadway Tests The open roadway tests in medium to heavy traffic scenarios were somewhat
encouraging in that they showed occlusion and AGC sensitivity effects from the
higher traffic densities effectively reduced the radar’s field-of-view by limiting
its range. In these cases, the reduced field-of-view did not inhibit tracking the
preceding in-lane vehicle throughout a variety of road geometries and provided
the benefit in eliminating much of the out-of-lane clutter. However, light traffic
tests showed how azimuthal clutter from numerous objects generate significant
transient radar returns which must be addressed by processing algorithms.
Many of these returns were from objects such as guardrails and roadside signs
located on curved roadways. Also, a variety of hills were encountered in the
open roadway tests which were found not to induce any significant returns in
the FLAR sensor. The biggest impact on the hills was the loss of track on the
preceding in-lane vehicle for low traffic densities.
6-6
7.0 SUMMARY
This section will summarize the findings and conclusions of the FLAR program.
7.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF VEHICLES AND ROADWAY OBJECTS

ERIM’s Fine Resolution Rotary Platform Imaging Facility was used to create radar images of
selected roadway objects. The roadway objects were selected to provide a meaningful set of data across
a variety of objects which could be commonly found in a roadway environment. To that end, data was
collected on the following objects:
l 1990 Chevy Corvette ZR-1
l 1995 Ford Taurus
l 1991 Jeep Wrangler
l 1993 Geo Metro
l Honda Motorcycle
l Human
l Stop Sign
l Cinder Block Wall
Data for each of the objects listed above was collected by a 94 GHz instrumentation radar. The
object was rotated while being illuminated by the radar so that reflection characteristics of the object
which are angle dependent could be identified. The radar data was processed to create two-dimensional
images of each object. The images are useful in identifying the parts of the object which are and are not
reflective to the radar energy for a given aspect angle.
In addition to the images, the radar data was processed to produce radar cross-section values for each
object. The radar cross-section, or RCS, is a quantitative value which describes the object’s level of
radar reflectivity. The data collected supports analyzing RCS both as function of aspect angle and as a
function of range across the target.
Section 3 of this final report provides a detailed description of both the image and digital data
outputs available as a result of the database creation. The reader is also referred to Appendix A which
includes a general discussion of radar cross-section and its dependence on object material, object shape,
and aspect angle.
In general, the critical information available in the database can be divided into three categories:
(1) maximum and minimum RCS values, (2) dependency of RCS on object shape or aspect angle, and
(3) distribution of radar reflectors on a given object.
First, examining the data across all the objects which were measured, indicates that RCS levels vary
from around +40 dBsm for a broadside perspective of a Jeep, to -2 dBsm for a motorcycle, down to
- 10 dBsm for a stop sign. Furthermore, besides varying from object to object, the RCS can vary greatly
for a single object depending upon aspect angle. For example, the RCS for the Jeep ranged from a
maximum of +40 dBsm down to well below +5 dBsm. This wide variation plays a significant role in the
development of radar sensor hardware which must have enough sensitivity to detect small RCS targets in
the presence of large RCS targets.
Second, observations of maximum RCS as a function of aspect angle illustrates how an object’s
shape affects its radar reflectivity. For example, a relatively square Taurus-type vehicle exhibits a
significant decrease in RCS as its aspect angle departs from 180 degrees (180 degrees is defined as
7-l
viewing a target from behind-&at is, looking at a vehicle’s rear end). On the other hand, a more curved
vehicle like a Corvette or Metro, exhibited less of an abrupt fall-off in RCS as the aspect angle departed
from 180 degrees. These characteristics can be related to the ability of an automotive radar to track a
given vehicle through a roadway curve. Again, knowledge of the extent of RCS changes as a function of
aspect angle are valuable to a sensor designer in terms of addressing sensitivity issues.
Third, the images which were produced by the RCS database work provide valuable insight into the
attributes of an object which actually cause the radar reflectivity. The images illustrated the distribution
of radar reflectors (a.k.a. scatterers) across a target. In particular, the impact of side-view mirrors,
wheels, under-body structures (e.g., transmission housing), and even body panel seams are evident.
Knowledge of these radar scattering mechanisms is critical for radar processing and threat assessment
algorithm developers. For example, the ability to identify multiple scatterers as part of a single object
will have a major impact on the load placed on the processing electronics.
In summary, this effort established an initial database which could support the efforts of hardware
designers, algorithm developers, and simulation programmers. The database’s value to hardware
designers and algorithm developers has already been discussed. However, its greatest utility may come
in the form of support to collision avoidance system simulation programs. The simulation programs can
make use of the data to apply range and aspect angle dependent RCS attributes to objects within the
simulation scene.
Since the establishment of the database, information has been made available to interested parties in
the form of hard copy images and data plots as well as digital data files. Hard copies of the data images
and plots have been compiled into a “Catalog of Radar Scattering Characteristics for Common Roadway
Objects.” Hard copies of the database information is available through NHTSA-OCAR and the digital
data files can be downloaded from ERIM’s website (http:\www.erim-int.com).
Finally, additional discussion of the database can be found in the technical paper:
. “Millimeter Wave Scattering Characteristics and Radar Cross Section Measurement of Common
Roadway Objects,” P.K. Zoratti, J.J. Ference, R. Majewski, and R.K. Gilbert. In Proceedings of
the SPIE on Collision Avoidance and Automated Traffic Management Sensors, Philadelphia, PA,
25-26 October 1995. Vol. 2592
7.2 ROADWAY TESTS

When one considers the number of different types of situations which may be presented to an
automotive radar, a combinatoric explosion of possibilities is encountered. Obviously it was not
practical to attempt evaluating the FLAR performance under all possible conditions. Instead, a series of
tests was designed to evaluate the FLAR performance in some standard roadway settings and also some
settings in which it was anticipated that the FLAR performance may be degraded. The primary variables
for the tests included: (1) roadway geometry (e.g., straight, curved, sloped); (2) background clutter
(e.g., out of path vehicles, guard rails, roadside signs); and (3) location and density of other moving
vehicles on the roadway. The complete test plan is provided in Appendix E of this report.
The tests were conducted on both a closed test track and the open roadway. To evaluate the sensor
performance during the road tests, the ERIM testbed vehicle acquired a variety of data including the raw
radar signal (i.e., the IF signal), the TRW processed data (e.g., range and range rate of object being
tracked), and video data of the road scene. In addition, a differential GPS system was used on several of
the tests to independently locate the position of a target vehicle with respect to the FLAR sensor.
Information on the DGPS truthing solution and its accuracy is provided in a paper in Appendix D of this
report.
7-2
It is important to note that in interpreting the test results, one must take care in differentiating
between the sensor performance and the system performance. The sensor performance pertains to the
radar sensor itself and how it interacts with a given roadway environment. The system performance
pertains to how the raw radar data is interpreted by the processing electronics and algorithms to depict
the actual state of the environment within the sensor’s field of view. The FLAR sensor used in these
tests was developed by TRW for an Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) type of application. Therefore, the
sensor as well as the processing algorithms was designed specifically for the ACC application which has
different requirements than a collision warning application. The real purpose of the tests conducted in
this project was to focus on the sensor performance, but when appropriate, the overall TRW FLAR
system performance was also analyzed.
The results from the various road scenarios tested are summarized in Section 6. A more complete
discussion of each test conducted on the closed test track is provided in Appendix F. The data
collections made on the open roadway are discussed in Appendix G. Both appendices include numerous
data plots illustrating the sensor response to the specific test scenario. Where appropriate, quantitative
calculations are provided. The analysis presented in Appendices F and G are is focused primarily on the
radar sensor performance perspective. The objective of this analysis was to identify particular scenarios
which could result in a raw radar data response which could prove difficult to interpret by standard
processing and threat assessment algorithms.
The scenarios identified as potential problems are summarized below. (Note that these results must
be taken in the context of the FLAR configuration which had 3 switched antennas with 3 degree azimuth
and 3 degree elevation beam widths. Sensors with different configuration can have significantly
different performance.):
l Roadside vehicles on a straight roadway were observed to generate returns in the raw radar
data at certain geometries which could be interpreted as objects within the host vehicle’s lane.
l Adjacent lane vehicles on a straight roadway viewed by on the FLAR side beam antennas can
generate multiple returns with significant range separation.
l Guard rails and other roadside objects on curved roadways generated significant returns
which could cause false alarm problems.
l Tracking vehicles around curved roadways could prove to be problematic without knowledge
of the roadway geometry in front of the sensor.
l Near-range cut-ins and tracking of narrow vehicles such as motorcycles could cause missed
detections due to limited radar field-of-view.
l Low RCS vehicles located between radar and large RCS vehicles could cause missed
detections.
l Bridge or other roadway overpasses were observed to generate significant returns in the raw
radar data under certain circumstances.
In general, the radar sensor itself performed very well in the roadway tests. Somewhat counter-
intuitive was the fact that the FLAR performed well under heavier traffic densities than under very light
traffic densities. This was a result of a decreased amount of clutter returns due to limiting the sensor’s
field-of-view by the near range traffic. The response time of the raw radar data signal to changes in the
roadway environment was virtually instantaneous given the 7 millisecond pulse repetition rate. For
example, objects which were present in the radar’s field-of-view for only a short duration, such as a
parked vehicle on the roadside in a curve, were easily identified in the raw radar data. Two areas of the
sensor configuration were identified as critical to achieving adequate roadway performance: (1) antenna
design and control, and (2) receiver gain control.
7-3
The FLAR radar antenna beam width and side lobe levels define the radar’s field-of-view at any
given instant. While the side lobe levels were not attributed to any shortcomings in the radar
performance, the roadway tests in this program indicated that the FLAR’s 3 degree azimuth beam width
may be too wide to reduce the effect of azimuth clutter to an acceptable level. For instance, vehicles
parked on the roadside on a straight roadway induced radar returns which could possibly be interpreted
as a low RCS object located in the center of the roadway. Also, it was identified that the FLAR would
have problems tracking the appropriate vehicle around a curve without knowledge of the roadway
geometry.
A number of automotive radar developers are addressing these shortcomings by using a narrower
beam antenna which is scanned across the desired field-of-view. By correlating the radar response in one
scan position with the response to another scan position, objects should be able to be placed much more
accurately in a azimuth plane. This will work well for azimuth clutter on a straight roadway, but it
appears that some knowledge of the roadway geometry preceding the host vehicle must be available to
the processing algorithms in order to adequately handle tracking vehicles through a curve. The ability to
“steer” the radar beam in a curve is highly desirable. Of course a scanned narrow beam antenna can add
significant cost, real-estate requirements, and processing complexity.
The other area of sensor configuration which was identified as critical was the receiver gain control.
The RCS data collected as part of this program indicates that objects may vary by as much as 40 dBsm or
more. In order to achieve this dynamic range, the FLAR sensor employs a variable gain amplifier with
the receiver electronics. When a large signal level is detected with the FLAR receiver, the gain of the
amplifier is decreased. This can lead to the undesired situation where a large RCS target at some
medium range, say a truck at 40 meters, can reduce the sensitivity of the radar such that a low RCS target
at some near range, say a motorcycle at 20 meters, is not detected.
The extension of the basic radar sensor performance to the higher level system functionality for ACC
and CWS applications becomes manifested in “false alarms” and “missed detections.” From the tests
conducted under this program, it was concluded that except for the limitations sited above, the FLAR
sensor performs fairly well from the pure radar perspective. That is, the raw radar data responds to its
environment in an acceptable manner. The success of applying the radar sensor to ACC and CWS lies in
the interpretation (i.e., processing) of the radar data in such a way as to produce an acceptable level of
false alarms and missed detections.
The roadway tests and their resulting data identified a number of scenarios which need to be
addressed by the processing algorithms to be employed by ACC and CWS applications. The primary
issue is the timely assessment of whether or not a detected object causes a real threat to the host vehicle.
Systems which purposely ignore returns from stationary objects will have a much easier task in assessing
threats, however, their value as a collision warning sensor will certainly be limited. Assuming that
detection and assessment of stationary objects is necessary means that all the returns from the roadway
“clutter” must be properly identified.
The returns which result from a guard rail as a vehicle enters a curve is a good example of a scenario
which needs to be addressed by the threat assessment algorithm. Analyzing the raw radar data without
knowledge of the roadway environment could lead to the conclusion that there is a stopped object within
the host vehicle lane. Depending upon the timing thresholds of a CWS, this scenario could generate a
false alarm. Data collected under this program shows a characteristic signature which develops from the
guard rail as the host vehicle maneuvers through the turn. Knowledge of this signature, combined with
information about the road geometry in front of the host vehicle and perhaps some knowledge of the
azimuthal extent of the guard rail would allow a much more robust threat assessment algorithm to be
employed. The empirical data collected during this program also indicates that roadside signs and
oncoming traffic pose similar problems.
7-4
7.3 TESTING, EVALUATION AND CERTIFYING METHODOLOGIES
During this program a number of testing and evaluation methods were identified and used to evaluate
the FLAR performance. In addition, the empirical data produced by the RCS and roadway
measurements will support the creation of future “controlled” test procedures which can be repeated to
refine an automotive radar’s performance both in terms of configuration and processing.
To begin with the FLAR sensor had to be characterized via laboratory type measurements to support
the analysis of roadway data. This laboratory characterization included measuring the range accuracy,
range resolution, and field-of-view of the radar sensor. These types of measurements will need to be
made to validate the typical performance specifications of the unit as claimed by the manufacturer.
Section 4 of this report provides details on the tests conducted and their results.
During the laboratory testing, several anomalies in the FLAR’s performance were identified and
explained. For example, the range accuracy of the FLAR was found to decrease with increased distance.
This error was attributed to the FLAR’s linear FM modulation rate (i.e., chirp rate) being slightly
different than that specified by TRW. This was not surprising since the RF electronics within the sensor
can have variability due to manufacturing, temperature, and age. The point to make is that procedures
for calibrating the operation of automotive radar’s must be developed to insure accurate performance.
After characterizing the baseline performance of the FLAR, the sensor was subjected to a number of
different environmental conditions in terms of precipitation, material occlusion, and radome/target
contamination. The results of these tests are provided in Section 5. The results of these tests is
significant in terms of comparing radar technology to other types of remote sensing alternatives. As
expected, the radar performed very well under precipitation tests which is the primary advantage of radar
over infrared and laser sensing systems- The materials test served to identify the type of material which
could be used to house the radar sensor as well as which materials could pose detection problems for
radar.
Beyond laboratory calibration procedures and environmental sensitivities of the FLAR sensor, this
program identified some common roadway scenarios which could cause erroneous performance. In
addition to identifying the scenarios, the data collected also provides quantitative information which can
be used to develop measurable and repeatable test procedures for validation of system performance.
For example, the open roadway tests conducted to evaluate the impact of bridge overpasses indicates
that for a host vehicle to operate adequately with 5 degrees of tilt due to loading the rear compartment,
the sensor must be able to reject the equivalent returns from a 2.5 dBsm object located approximately
14 feet above the roadway with a large azimuthal extent. Note that this problem statement defines
several parameters around which a standardized roadway test can be created. With this type of empirical
data, a test track can be outfitted with calibrated targets positioned properly to represent a given roadway
scenario.
Besides generating the empirical data sited above, this program also validated the use of a
differential GPS solution to serve as a truthing mechanism for specially orchestrated dynamic roadway
testing.
In addition to actual physical testing of the radar sensor, the data produced by the RCS
measurements database created under this program will support the simulation’ testing of collision
warning sensors. While a number of problematic roadway scenarios were identified during the roadway
testing effort of this program, it was not possible to subject the FLAR to the extremely large number of
combinatoric roadway scenario possibilities. Also, safety of the test engineers and drivers limited the
types of orchestrated maneuvers which could be conducted. For these reasons, simulation testing of well
modeled sensors and targets is still necessary.
7-5
7.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS
In summary, the foundation for generating a series of tests to validate the performance of an
automotive radar has been produced by this program. This series of tests includes laboratory calibration,
evaluation of environmental performance, repeatable roadway testing using calibrated reflectors to
represent a roadway scenario, and the use of simulation.
To conclude this report, several areas related to collision warning and adaptive cruise control system
development which warrant further investigation will be cited.
Expansion of RCS Database

There has been a high level of interest from system developers in the RCS database since its creation-
This database consists of a limited number of objects all collected at a single range under benign weather
conditions. Expansion of the database to include a more diverse set of objects under varying
environmental conditions should be explored to support future sensor development and simulation
program efforts.
Mutual Interference
This program focused on the response of the FLAR sensor to a variety of roadway scenarios.
However, these roadway scenarios did not have any other radar sensors present. Susceptibility to mutual
interference is highly dependent upon sensor confirmation. As these sensors are introduced into the
automotive market and their penetration increases, the mutual interference among sensors may become
an issue. Both physical and simulation techniques can be used to evaluate what level of impact mutual
interference may have on widespread system operational use.
Manufacturing, Installation. and Calibration Issues

If FLAR-type sensors are to be mass produced and factory installed on vehicles, issues regarding
sensor calibration must be addressed. For example, to what degree will an installation tolerance of
+1 degree of sensor alignment affect system performance? Should the sensor be self-aligning? To what
extent will the aging of the signal generation electronics affect system accuracy? If a host vehicle gets
bumped in the parking lot and throws the system out of alignment, should the system detect the problem
and notify the operator?
These types of issues are obviously far-reaching and sensor-dependent, however, some basic
research in this area may affect sensor design to address these issues.
Use of Simulation to Test Sensor Design and Algorithm lmplementation

Due to safety and the number of combinatoric roadway scenario possibilities, simulation of collision
warning sensors may prove invaluable in the sensor design and algorithm implementation process. For
example, one roadway scenario which was not tested as part of this program is the near-range cut-in. In
this scenario an adjacent lane vehicle would enter the host vehicle’s lane at a range of less than 5 meters.
This scenario poses problems for an automotive radar with limited field-of-view. This scenario was not
tested in this program due to safety concerns for the drivers. However, appropriately modeled simulation
programs could address this and other dangerous scenarios and allow for sensor performance evaluation.
7-6
Human Factors and Response to Nuisance Alarms
Work related to the acceptable level of nuisance or false alarms would provide a valuable threshold
benchmark to which automotive radar systems could be designed.
Human Factors and Response to Avoidance Maneuvers
To take collision safety to the ultimate level, collision sensors may someday initiate avoidance
maneuvers. Basic research on the types and severity of maneuvers which are acceptable to the vehicle
operator is necessary before any such system is implemented.
7-7
APPENDIX A. RADAR SYSTEM MODEL
This appendix has been included to provide a framework for the discussion in the body of this report
and the remaining appendices; it covers some of the fundamentals regarding the operations of a
Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave (FMCW) radar. The TRW Forward-Looking Automotive
Radar (FLAR) used for this evaluation program operates on the FMCW principles outlined here. Much
of the material in this appendix was taken from a two-day automotive radar course developed by ERIM
for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
This appendix contains the following information:
l Description of Radar Functions
l Components of a Radar System
l Object Reflections
l FMCW Radar Operating Principles
A.1 DESCRIPTION OF RADAR FUNCTIONS

The functions that a radar sensor provides to a larger system, whether it is collision avoidance or
adaptive cruise control, can be broken down into three basic functions and two more advanced functions,
as outlined below:
l Basic Functions:
- Detection: determining whether or not an object is present in the vicinity of the radar
sensor
- Ranging: reporting the linear radial distance from the radar sensor to a detected object
- Relative Range Rate (aka Relative Radial Velocity): reporting changes in range of
detected objects as a function of time
l Advanced Functions:
- Positioning: determining the location of an object with respect to the radar in terms of
range and direction
- Tracking: the ability to uniquely identify detected objects and maintain a time-history of
their position (implemented as a control algorithm in the processor which may/may not
affect actual radar operations-for example, antenna control)
The basic functions are provided by direct analysis of the radar return signals. The advanced
functions require more complex processing which may require consideration of radar signal history or
interfacing with electronics other than the radar itself.
The “detection” function is normally achieved by comparing the radar energy reflections captured by
the receive antenna to some threshold level. When an object generates returns within the radar receiver
which are sufficient in amplitude, the object is “detected” by the radar.
The “ranging” function is normally carried out by measuring the time delay corresponding to the
elapsed time between the transmission of radar energy and reception of the radar energy reflected back
by that object. FMCW radars, like the FLAR, use a modulation technique on the transmitted signal to
determine the time delay.
The “‘relative range rate” function can be achieved by two different methods. The first and most
direct is to measure the “Doppler” shift induced on the transmitted radar energy by the movement of the
object off which the radar energy reflects. The Doppler shift causes the frequency of the transmitted
A-l
waveform to be shifted either up or down, depending upon the target’s movement. The second method is
range differentiation, which uses the difference between two consecutive range measurements to
determine the rate at which the range is changing. The FLAR uses the range differentiation method to
calculate relative range rate.
The “positioning” function requires knowledge of the radar’s antenna beam pattern and the current
direction in which the antenna is pointed. By scanning an antenna beam across a scene and correlating
returns to the beam’s direction, the radar sensor can position the target with respect to the radar. The
TRW FLAR uses a beam-switching mechanism to point the beam in three different directions. (Another
method of positioning is the use of “‘Monopulse Radar” which is beyond the scope of this appendix.)
The “tracking” function is achieved by having the radar internal processing electronics identify and
maintain a time-history of the location of objects detected in the scene.
Figure A-l illustrates the role of a radar in an overall system like collision warning. The radar itself
is a source of data input to the higher level system. From the radar developer perspective, the partition
between the radar signal processing electronics and higher level system processing can be drawn in
various locations, as indicated by the dotted line in Figure A-l.
With respect to the diagram in A- 1, this program evaluates the raw radar signal that connects the
transmit/receive electronics to the signal processing electronics within the “Radar Sensor” box. To a
lesser degree, the program also evaluates the TRW proprietary algorithms which define the signal
processing performed on the raw radar signal.
Radar Sensor
Driver Interface
Vehicle
Vehicle Path
State Prediction
Figure A-l. Radar as Part of a Collision Warning System
A.2 COMPONENTS OF A RADAR SENSOR

Briefly, a radar is a device which emits electromagnetic energy (radio waves) and receives
reflections of the emitted energy from objects within the radar’s field-of-view. The field of view is
defined by the antenna pattern(s). In the case of the FLAR, the emitted energy is in the 94 GHz region.
Figure A-2 shows a block diagram of a “generic” radar sensor. Table A-l lists the purpose for each
of the components of the block diagram.
A-2
Antenna
Controller
Modulator
Waveform
Generator Transmitter --.----.
User Timing
Interface and
Control
Antenna
Radar
Signal Receiver Radorne
Processor
Data
Output
Figure A-2. A Generic Radar
Table A-1. Generic Radar Components

Component Purpose
Waveform Generator Controls the modulation of the transmitted waveform

Modulator Controls the transmitter in tenns of turning it on and off and dictating the
frequency which is transmitted
Transmitter Controls the power level of the emitted radio wave energy
Antenna/Controller Concentrates and directs the emission of the radio energy
Receiver Amplifies, filters, translates/demodulates the reflected energy, and formats it for
use by the processing electronics
Signal Processor Performs functions on the received signal to extract detection, range, and range
rate info
Timing and Control Synchronizes the operation of the other radar components
A.3 OBJECT REFLECTIONS

Different materials reflect radar energy to differing levels. Conductive surfaces such as metals
reflect radar energy very well. Non-conductive surfaces reflect radar energy to varying degrees, based
on their dielectric constant. Figure A-3 illustrates that when radar energy strikes an object, three things
can happen: (1) the energy can be reflected, (2) the energy can be absorbed by the material, and (3) the
energy can pass through the material. The degree to which any of these three possibilities occurs is
dependent upon the dielectric constant, object geometry, and the angle at which the radar energy strikes
the object (i.e., the incident angle).
A-3
...
Incident
Reflected
----+
Transmitted
Snell's Law
Angle is smaller if
~ei>µ1E1
Reflection from Reflection and

Non-Conductive Surface Refraction Angles
Figure A-3. Radar Energy Reflection and Refraction
Figure A-4 indicates what happens to the radar energy based on the incident angle. Reflection is
similar to the optical reflection observed in a mirror. Refraction occurs when the radar energy gets
"bent" as it passes through the interface between two mediums with different dielectric constants.
Relatively
High RCS
Relatively
Low RCS
Figure A-4. Radar Returns and Orientation
Besides its material, the object's orientation also dictates how much energy is reflected back toward
the radar. Figure A-3 shows an object which in one orientation causes a large return in the radar, while
in another orientation causes a relatively low level return in the radar.
The amount of energy reflected back toward a radar by a particular object at a given orientation with
respect to the radar is quantified by a parameter known as "Radar Cross Section" (RCS). The formal
definition for RCS is given by the equation:
sigma = * 1t * Reflected power/ Unit solid Angle

4
Incident power/ Unit area
RCS is typically measured in square meters or the decibel equivalent "dBsm," which is referenced to
1 square meter.
A more intuitive definition for RCS is illustrated in Figure A-5. Shown are two similar theoretical
test setups. The first setup shows the object for which the RCS is to be determined, in this figure, a car.
The second shows a theoretical scoop which captures energy and sends it to an isotropic antenna (i.e., an
A-4
antenna which emits an equal amount of energy in all directions). The size of this scoop can be changed
to any required size. The RCS of the object is equal to the size the scoop must be in order to induce
the same level of return in the radar. For example, suppose the car induces a 1 volt signal in the
radar's receiver, and the scoop must be sized to 3 square meters to induce a similar 1 volt signal. Then
the RCS for the car is 3 square meters (or 4.8 dBsm).
{> --
- Object Echo
-
{> -- Model Echo
..,."'t
Q :;(-+- Isotropic
Radiator
¥ + ')l
(Edde)
Figure A-5. Radar Cross Section Illustrated
In summary, it is a complex combination of reflection, refraction, absorption, transmission, and

geometric directivity which defines how a particular object is viewed by a radar sensor. A parameter for
measuring the "size" of an object from the radar's perspective is called the radar cross section, which
indicating how much energy will be reflected back to the radar.
A.4 FMCW RADAR OPERATING PRINCIPLES

FMCW radar operation follows the following basic principles:
• The transmit signal is frequency modulated (normally a linear modulation-chirp)
• The modulation of the received echo is compared to the modulation of the transmitted signal to
determine time delay and therefore range
• Range rate is determined by range differentiation or Doppler processing
Graphical representations in both the time and frequency domains for a chirp waveform are provided
in Figure A-6. The linear frequency modulation of a chirp is applied to the transmit frequency in an
FMCW radar. In the case of the FLAR, the transmitted waveform is modulated over a 375 MHz
bandwidth centered at 94 GHz.
F..,
F,.,.-
Chirp Rate == r == Signal Bandwidth (Mo/..,.,) T=O

Pulse Duration
Time
Figure A-6. Time and Frequency of a Chirp Waveform
A-5
The key to FMCW operation is that the shape of the waveform which returns to the radar after
reflecting off objects is the same shape as the transmitted waveform. Figure A-7 illustrates how an
FMCW radar can compare the transmitted and received signals to determine time delay.
The transmitted signal is emitted from the radar at time T = 0. Some time-later (Td1), a reflection
back from an object is received by the radar. During the time of flight of the reflected signal, the
transmitted signal frequency has increased as dictated by the chirp rate. Therefore, at any given instant
of time after Td1, there is a difference in frequency between the signal being transmitted and the one
which was received. This frequency difference is proportional to the time of flight for the received
signal (the proportionality constant is the chirp rate). Since radar energy travels through the atmosphere
at a constant speed (c = 3 * 10 meters/second), the time of flighfis therefore proportional to the range to
8
the object which reflected the energy (the proportionality constant is c/2). This is the principle by which
an FMCW radar measures range.
Obviously, the radar can receive reflected signals from many objects at different ranges within its
field of view. The physical means of comparing the transmitted and received signal frequencies is
performed by a passive component called an RF Mixer. The transmit and received signal are input to
this component, and the output is the difference between the two. The output of the mixer is referred to
as the intermediate frequency or IF. The plots of the "raw radar signal" provided in this report
actually map the IF signal from the FLAR sensor.
By capturing the IF signal from the FLAR and analyzing it with frequency domain processing
techniques, an evaluation for how the radar is responding to its environment can be made.
F_
F=
>,
CJ
a;
g. F_
CJ
ti: F1F1=r·Td1
F.,,
F"" F1Frr·Tc12
R1= Td,*c/2
T=O T.,T., R2= Tc12*c/2
Figure A-7. Determining Time Delay
A-6
APPENDIX B. MATERIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
DATA
B.1 MATERIALS TESTS-SUMMARY
B.1 .1 Purpose
The intent of the following tests was to quantitatively assess the effect on the quality of the received
radar signal when the radar’s “view” of a target is obstructed by various materials found on a car or in a
roadway situation.
B.1.2 Procedure
The FLAR was placed approximately I meter off the ground on a level surface. A 5 dB comer
reflector was then placed 20 meters away from the FLAR, at about the same height on a Styrofoam
pillar. A reading of the comer reflector without any obstruction was taken to get a baseline from which
all other tests could be compared. About 1.5 seconds of data were collected (about 200 samples) using
ERIM’s Data Collection Software. The baseline test was verified, as were all others, by recording the
test with a SVHS camera.
The next step was to test the effect of individual materials on the FLAR sensor. A large piece of the
material to be tested was placed in the beam of the sensor. Another 1.5 seconds of data were collected
using the ERIM Data Collection Software. The tests were repeated using the following pieces of
material:
glass, Plexiglas, epoxy glass, thin cardboard, thick cardboard (about l/3” thick), TPO (a plastic
material often used in automotive bumpers), plywood, and R A M (radar absorbing material).
After the tests were completed, the data was analyzed
on the ERIM Analysis PC using the ERIM’s FUR
08
Analysis Software. The AGC attenuation values were
recorded and a Matlab script was written to analyze and 06
I-
average the return levels. Outputs from the Matlab

analysis are attached. - 04
The plot in Figure B-l (from the analysis PC) shows

02
the return from a 5 dBsm comer reflector located just over
20 meters from the radar. The automatic gain control 0.0
0 20 39 59 78 98 117
(AGC) setting is given below the plot. The AGC is a 10 30 49 69 88 !OB
variable gain amplifier used in the radar receiver circuit to fm,p(,,,J
increase the dynamic range of the A/D converters. The AGC: 4.15391 volts
AGC setting must be compensated for when comparing Attenuation: 19.90 dB
relative return levels. The attenuation value (in dB
magnitude) associated with the AGC setting is also Figure B-l. Baseline Test
provided for each plot. The level of attenuation is
referenced to the maximum gain of the amplifier.
The plot in Figure B-2 shows the return from a 5 dBsm comer reflector located just over 20 meters
from the radar, with a sheet of glass placed about 1 meter from the RADAR at an angle of about
15 degrees from vertical. The automatic gain control (AGC) setting and corresponding magnitude
B-l
attenuation is given below the plot. The reflected signal from the glass can be seen in Figure B-2 as the
smaller of the two spikes.
Radal'Oulput
0.15
o.s
0.4
~ 03 Return
from glass
02 obstruction
OJ
1111 I 11 I
~['. .La,l.J,,IIJ
on o 20 39 59 n 98 111
10 30 49 69 88 108
mg,(.,)
AGC: 3.90599 volts

Attenuation: 3.63 dB
Figure B-2. Glass (15 degree angle)
B.1.3 Results
Three effects were observed during the material obstruction tests: (1) target signal strength
attenuation, (2) direct reflection from the material being tested, and (3) creation of multipath returns.
Each of these effects are discussed below. A rudimentary discussion of reflection and refraction
mechanisms is provided at the end of this section.
Attenuation
Table B-l summarizes the attenuation results of the material tests. The return levels and AGC
settings for each collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to calculate the “AGC
adjusted voltage” values which are then compared to determine the attenuation levels. The “Baseline”
measurement was used as the reference for each attenuation calculation. Note that the attenuation levels
provided are for “two-way” propagation. In other words, the radar signal passed through the material
under test twice--once on transmission, and once after it was reflected off of the target in the scene.
Figure B-3 illustrates the relative attenuation levels listed in Table B-l _ The materials are listed from
lowest attenuation level to highest. Note that the RAM attenuation level represents the maximum
attenuation level for the given test set-up (e.g., size and distance of target)- Returns from the reference
reflector placed in the scene were always observable in the radar data except for tests with the RAM.
Even in tests with the plywood as the obstructing material, the FLAR was still capable of detecting the
5 dBsm reference target at 20 meters.
B-2
Table B-1. Attenuation
AGC AGC Two-Way
Measured Control AGCMag. Adjusted Power
Return Setting Attenuation Return Attenuation
Material Description Volts (v) {dB) Volts (dB)
Baseline 0.458 4.154 -19.9034 1.4403 0.0

Clear Plexiglas 0.405 3.956 -5.9292 0.5698 8.1
Thin Cardboard 0.4 3.906 -3.6324 0.4930 9.3
Windshield Glass (15 degrees) 0.381 3.906 -3.6324 0.4696 9.7
Epoxy Glass 0.343 3.906 -3.6324 0.4228 10.6
Thick Cardboard (corrugated) 0.188 3.906 -3.6324 0.2317 15.9
TPO 0.17 3.906 -3.6324 0.2095 16.7
TPO (15 degrees) 0.163 3.906 -3.6324 0.2009 17.1
Plywood (.75") 0.056 3.906 -3.6324 0.0690 26.4
RAM 0.05 3.906 -3.6324 0.0616 27.4
Two-way Power Attenuation

(dB)
30.0
25.0 1--
-
20.0 ,__
-
15.0 .
;;;.
-- - ~
-'~-'-~~
:~-~
10.0 - ,__
5.0 -I -~i '

"
- !!-
0.0
~I ' I-
,:j i ~ : li· - i
"'
::,..
Xu,
Oas
Cl.-
w(!}
Figure B-3. Attenuation Levels
The two-way attenuation levels vary from 8.1 dB for the clear plexiglas to over 17 dB for the TPO (a
plastic-type material commonly used for bumpers and facia styling) to over 26 dB for the plywood.
Reflections
In addition to attenuating the return levels from the reference reflector, many of the materials
produced a direct radar signal return (i.e., the material reflected the radar energy. The materials
producing the largest reflections were the windshield glass and TPO materials. Note that these reflection
levels were highly dependent upon the orientation between the FLAR and the material sample. The plots
B-3
at the end of this section indicate that these reflection levels can be nearly equal to the return level from
the reference reflector. Of course the material samples were at a much closer range than the reference
reflector--! to 2 meters for the material samples versus 20 meters for the reference reflector.
Much lower direct reflections were observed from the cardboard, plexiglas and plywood materials.
While these reflections were clearly evident, they were not much above the noise floor of the FLAR.
Multipath
In addition to the reflections and signal attenuation, several of the material samples were observed to
produce multipath returns from the reference reflector. Figure B-4 shows a diagram of how an
obstructing material can cause a multipath return. Some level of energy is refracted by the material and
directed along an indirect path to the target. Since the distance the radar signal must travel the indirect
path is longer than that along the direct path, the resulting range reading from the radar will be greater
than the actual direct range to the target.
Material
Sample
Target
Direct
FLAR <}----- ;:----------~-~()II _______________ _

'' Multipath
'' Reflection
' ...
' ...
' --
Figure B-4. Multipath Reflection
Figure B-5 shows the radar returns collected with a TPO material sample oriented 15 degrees off
vertical. The multipath returns from the reference reflector are clearly evident. These effects were also
observed for other materials tested. The effect of this phenomenon is that the peak level return from the
reference reflector is decreased and false returns are produced. See the plots attached for more multipath
examples.
TPO 15 Degrees 9607090 rdf Records 1 to 200
0
01
,n .so AA Rn 1nn 1,n 1.4n

Ronno
Figure B-5. Multipath Returns From TPO Material at 15 Degree Incident Angle
B-4
B.1.3.1 Reflection and Refraction Mechanisms
Radar signals are reflected by two different forms of media: conducting and non-conducting. When
a wave strikes a conducting medium, the electric field of the wave induces an inverse electric field in the
medium. This electric field then radiates a wave back at the radar sensor, as a returned signal.
Time 1 Time 2 Time 3
Figure B-6. Reflection From Conductive Surface
A non-conducting medium also reflects RADAR signals, but not always all of it. The amount of the
signal that is reflected back at the sensor depends on the ratio of the dielectric constants (Kc) of the two
media (in this case we use air as a medium). The dielectric constant of a medium determines the division
between the electric and magnetic fields of a wave. When the RADAR signal enters a new medium the
dielectric constant readjusts the wave’s electric and magnetic field ratio. In order to do this, some of the
signal must be reflected.
K1
Incident
·-·--· .t
••
Reflected
------>
Transmitted
Figure B-7. Reflection From Non-Conductive Surface
If the angle of incidence (0- 1) is greater than zero when a wave enters a new region with a different
dielectric constant, then the wave is deflected, otherwise known as refraction. The deflection increases
the angle of incidence of the wave proportional with the ratio of the dielectric constant of the two media.
Snell's Law
Angle is smaller if
~½> µli;l
Figure B-8. Reflection and Refraction Angles
The level of return of the reflected signal, also depends upon the orientation and shape of the object.
The orientation and shape of the object determines the reflected signal’s direction. Figure B-9 illustrates
how orientation affects signal return level.
B-S
~
Relatively
High RCS
»)~~ !:. -
Relatively
Low RCS - ,w~)} ·~ ,- ,--
Figure B-9. Object Orientation Effect on Reflected Signal
B.1.4 Conclusions
The tests discussed in this section have evaluated the effects of various materials on the target return
levels for a 94 GHz radar. Figure B-3 summarizes the test results. The power attenuation level is
provided for each material tested. Again, these attenuation levels correspond to the effects on a 94 GHz
radar, but similar results can be expected at 77 GHz Key observations of the test include:
l All materials tested allowed some portion of the radar signal to pass through the material and
attenuated the RADAR signal to some degree.
l Except for the RAM material, the return from the reference reflector was still observable.
l Some materials reflected energy at certain orientations which was observable.
l Some materials produced multipath returns at certain orientations.
For styling, automotive radars will have to be integrated into the overall vehicle structure. This
means the radar antennas will most likely be covered by some type of material, therefore knowledge of
the absorption, trausmitivity, and reflection characteristics of various materials is critical to successful
implementation of automotive radar sensors.
These materials tests identify issues which must be addressed to successfully integrate a radar into
the automobile. First of all, if the radar antennas are to be concealed by some material, the signal
attenuation resulting from the chosen material must be compensated for to maintain the required radar
sensitivity. This can be easily done by increasing the transmit power of the radar. However, this may
have serious cost implications. Therefore, the concealing material must be carefully selected. Typically
suggested locations for automotive radars would place the sensors either behind the plastic material of
the front facia or grill, or behind the glass of the windshield or headlights.
The quantitative data of these tests (see Figure B-3) indicate that placing the sensor behind a slanted
windshield may produce less attenuation than placing it behind TPO-type plastic. An even better
solution is to place it behind clear Plexiglas. Another option is to utilize specially fabricated material
which exhibits very low attenuation, however, this could add cost to the system implementation.
In orienting the radar with respect to a concealing material, care must be taken not to produce a
significant direct reflection which may saturate the radar receiver and “‘blind” it to other objects. Also,
and perhaps more serious from a threat assessment algorithm perspective, is the danger of having a
concealing material generate numerous multipath returns. This could potentially place large burdens on
the sensor processing electronics in terms of having to generate track files for objects which do not
actually exist in the scene. Some level of multipath is inevitable just due to the complexity of the
roadway environment, but inappropriately choosing and orienting a material in front of the radar sensor
may severely compound the problem.
B-6
Another important issue regarding the attenuation characteristics of materials concerns accurately
reporting range to roadway targets constructed from non-metal material. As vehicle manufacturers
continue to reduce weights, the use of non-conductive plastic materials is expected to increase. As the
results of these material tests indicate, use of non-conductive materials could severely decrease the
overall radar cross-section of the vehicle.
B-7
Basalne 900700a.rlf Reoords 1 to 200 Basa,ne. 9001008.rlf MaxAetunof Reoords 1 to200A~.45853
07 0~r----r---,-----.---.----~
06 05
05
0.48
04
~ lo46
lo3 I
044
02
042
01
0,4L----'-----'----L---~---~
40 8J 00 100 120 140 0 50 100 150 200 2fil
20
Fmge Puse
RAM: 900700b.rlf Reoords 1 to 200 RAM: 900700b.rlf Max Aetun of Reoords 1 to200A~.048647
006 0056.---~----r-----------~
005 0054
0~
0.!»
,0.00 i 000
i
0.02 0.048
0.01 0046
00440;;----::::---:=----'-----'---_J
20 40 8J 00 100 120 140 50 100 150 200 2fil
Fmge Puse
OearPlexl!lass, 9007!Qillf~ 110200 Oeer Plexl!lass 96070ttl.lll Max Alltm d Rlcolds 1 to 200 A-.aage=O 4lli33
05 o~~--~---~--~------~
045
044
0.4
0.35
0.3
~025 I 04
i 02 i
0.38
0.15
01
038
034
20 40 ro 00 100 120 140 0 50 100 150 200 250
Fmge Nse
Epoxy (;lass. 960J00k.lll ~ 1 to 200 Epoxy (;lass• 960100k Ill Max Reltm d A3coni9 1 to 200 A-.aage=0.3431
04 0.4,------,-----,-----,----,----,
035
0.38
0.3
038
0.25
~ 02 lo34
i 0.15
i
0.32
. 01
0.3
o~.____._____,____.____.______.
20 40 ro oo 100 120 140 0 50 100 150 200 250
Fmge Nse
llin CanlJoard: 8007009nf R3colds 1 to 200 llin QlfdJoaro: 960700g nf Max Relum d Records 1 to 200 A....age=().40034
07 0~,-----,------.-----r----,---~
05
06
048
05 0.46
044
04
~ lo42
ioa i 0.4
0.36
02
036
01
034
0~L----'---_,__ _ _..__ __._ _ _ ~
20 40 00 00 100 120 140 0 50 100 150 200 250

lfflJ9 Nse
llick C8r<llotw'CI 9007Wl nf Alooltls 1 to200

025 llick QlfdJoaro: 900700tnf Max R;(und Alooltls 1to200A181BQ8=01oo:J1
om~---,,----.----..----,,---~
022
02
021
0.15 02
~
1°'19
i 0.1
Jo.10
0.17
00:i
0.16
. 0.15
20 40 00 00 100 120 140 014.___ __._ _ __.__ _ _..__ __._ _ _
~
lfflJ9 0 50 100 150 200 250
Nse
131138 15 Degees: 960700c.rd Reoocds 1 lo 200
045
131138 15 Degees: 960700c rd Max Rllum d Rlca'dl 1 to 200 A ~ 38004
O.~,----,----.-----.------.-----,
0.4
044
035
042
03
:E:025 04
j 02 I
jo.38
0.15
036
0.1
034
20 40 100 120 140 0.32L----'-----'---......JL----'-----'

0 50 100 150 200 250
Puse
Glass 15 Degrees• 900700c rdf

Glass 15 ~agrees• 900700c rdl
•:·
05
04
~
:03
~
~ 02
ai
0:
01
200
20 40
150 0 Pulses (Time)
Distance (melers)
1PO 900700! n:f Aaoon:ls 1 to 200 1PO 900700!.n:f Ma>c Allum d Aaoon:ls 1 to 200 A\8!llg8=0.16900
025 0~,-----.,---...----.-----r---~
021
02 02
019
0.15
~
1018
Jo,11
Io., 0.16
015
0.00
0.14
013..__ __,__ _ __.__ _ _.___ __,__ _ __,
100 120 140 0 50 100 150 200 250

20 40 00 00
Fagi Fuse
TPO •0007(81 rdf TPO • OOOl'Wf rdf
025
02
~
Jg O15
>
§ 01
.;
0:
005
~-~ . . _,,,.,,.--- 200
1ro o 20 40 60 00 100 120 140

Pulses (rrme) D1slance (melers)
Dislance (melers)
1l'O 15 Def1Bes: 900709e.rd Ma,c A!lim d RecXnls 1 to 200 A ~ 16329
1l'O 15 Def1Bes: 9007008.rd Aeoords 1 to 200 0.19'----.----~---~--~---~
0.2
0.18
0.18
0.16
014 0.17
0.12
~ 0.1
lo.1e
J0.00
J
0.15
0.00
0.04 0.14
0.13~--~---~--~'---------'
0 50 100 150 200 250
20 40 00 00 100 120 140 ruse
Fmge
TPO 15 Degrees -!Ji0700e rdf TPO 15 Degrees• ~We.rd!
':•'
~-.
'•:.
D2 ·-.~. ·· ....
'!,,,
···:·
. ·:.
," " " , ',•,,. ,'. ','_ /,:·,.;'l1il.',•. ,1\1J·l·,~,'..{it1~.)1i ·:···

I 1.. ' I ,,,,1/i~l·IJ:'!\~)'i'.· ··· .. ~
tf1Jahi~~/WJ~.:t·': :\,. · •
I
1
mlf:\:''
'L 'I .,__

I.I ::s. __ Ill
DI
~
100 0 Pulses (f"Hlle) 40 00 00 100 Ill 140
Distance (meters) Distance (meters)
............ : .... ..... ·~.. . . . .
~
I
i§
g
§
J
'15 I
j 5!
:!
t!
i
J g ~o
~ B
(ewu)-;;as1nd
e ~ ~ ~ c::>
0
~ ~ 8 l!l
0 0 0
0
(SIP\)U11161:1
_:·· ............. :·· ······:!··· ... .
~
:·: ....... -:.- ..........: .........:... .
~
§ 51 'E
g
- ~ c::,
Ii:! .... ····-
J
t!
S!
I
I S!
J !i
@
c::,c::,
B
c::,
~
I:;
0 ~ ~ ~
WU11161:!d
8 0
0
B.2 PRECIPITATION TESTS-SUMMARY
B.2.1 Purpose
The purpose of these precipitation tests was to evaluate the effects of snow, rain, and fog on the
performance of the FLAR sensor.
B.2.2 Procedure
In general, the precipitation data collections were conducted as outlined below:
1. A reference target (either a vehicle or comer reflector) was placed within the FLAR’s field-of-
view at nominally a 10 to 20 meter range.
2. FLAR data was collected without any precipitation present, to provide a baseline for the specific
collection.
3. Data was collected with varying degrees of precipitation rates present in the area between the
FLAR and the target.
4. The data resulting from collections with precipitation present was compared to the baseline
readings to determine the precipitation’s effect on the performance. Return level averages and
variances were used to quantify the effects.
Both natural and simulated precipitation tests were conducted to arrive at the results discussed
below. The snow data was derived from natural snow precipitation only. The fog data was collected
using an artificial fog machine. The rain data was collected using both natural rain and rain from a high-
pressure washer to allow the precipitation rate to be more controlled.
B.2.3 Results
A set of representative plots summarizing the results of the tests are included at the end of this
document. Note that data for these tests was collected during various periods and the results correlated
fairly well from one collection scenario to another.
In general, the precipitation tested had little effect on the FLAR’s performance. In particular, the
precipitation particles were not found to produce any significant returns to the F’LAR and the attenuation
levels were very small.
Table B-2 shows the quantitative summary of the tests. The return levels and AGC settings for each
collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to calculate the ‘AGC adjusted voltage”
values which are then compared to determine the attenuation levels. The “Baseline” for each collection
for “two-way” propagation. In other words, the radar signal passed through the precipitation-filled
atmospheric medium twice--once on transmission, and once after it was reflected off of the target in the
scene.
Table B-2. Precipitation Measurement
AGC Two-Way Two-Way
Target Measured AGC AGC Mag. Adjusted Power Power
Precipitation Range Return Control Attenuation Return Attenuation Attenuation
Description (m) Volts Setting (v) (dB) Volts (dB) (dB/10 m)
Light R a i n 13 0.492 3.906 -3.6324 0.6064 -0.4 -0.29
Moderate Rain 13 0.441 3.906 -3.6324 0.5436 0.6 0.44
Heavy Rain 13 0.421 3.906 -3.6324 0.5189 1.0 0.75
Moderate Snow 22 0.083 3.906 -3.6324 0.1023 -0.7 -0.30
Heavy Snow 22 0.085 3.906 -3.6324 0.1048 -0.9 -0.39
Fog 1 3 0.366 3.906 -3.6324 0.4511 0.3 1.05
Fog 2 3 0.375 3.906 -3.6324 0.4622 0.1 0.35
Figure B-10 illustrates the attenuation levels produced from the various levels and types of
precipitation. These attenuation levels have been normalized to 10 meter ranges. These values are
considered insignificant since return levels from the FLAR during static collections with precision
reference reflectors in a controlled environment have been observed to fluctuate by values similar to
these. Note that negative attenuation levels indicate that the peak return from the target in the scene
actually increased. This could potentially be due to the target getting wet aud causing more of the radar
energy to be directed back in the direction of the FLAR or due to the ground between the radar and the
target getting wet and causing a higher level of multipath return.
1.20
1.00 ,.;------==------i?,-----l
0.80
0.60
0.40 E!Two-way
0.20 Power
0.00 Attenuation
-0.20 (dB/10m)
-0.40.
.E £
Cl <ll
:J a:
Figure B-10. Two-Way Power Attenuation (dB/10 m)
B.2.4 Conclusions
The primary conclusion of this test is that the FLAR performance was not observed to be
significantly affected by the various levels and types of precipitation tested. In particular, the
precipitation did not produce any observable return levels in the FLAR IF signal, and the attenuation
levels were very low. However, the combination of a low RCS target at a far range during heavy rates of
precipitation (or heavy fog) could cause a problem for an automotive radar.
B-16
The results achieved during this testing correlate well with those in the open literature. There are
several papers which have been published on the attenuation of high frequency communication systems
as a result of precipitation. In general, both theoretical and empirical attenuation levels -are stated to be
about 10 dB per kilometer (one-way). Relating the information obtained in theopen literature to the
operating ranges for automotive radars, one could expect power attenuation levels on the order of 1 to
3 dB at 100 meter ranges.
The measurements conducted as part of this program indicate that the actual attenuation levels may
be somewhat higher than the 1 to 3 dB values mentioned above. More practical values could range from
2 to 10 dB of power loss at 100 meter ranges. Of course these values are highly dependent upon the rate
of precipitation and also the particulate size of the precipitation. As the particulate size approaches r/4
wavelength of the radar frequency, the particulate will begin acting as an antenna.
In practical terms, the most important outcome of this test was the verification that the FLAR was
capable of detecting targets witbm it field-of-view in the presence of significant precipitation. Except for
the light rain collections, the target itself was visually obscured from the FLAR’s location. During the
heavy rain and fog tests, the target was frequently totally visually obscured. Despite the visual
obscuration, return levels from the target were easily observed in the raw radar signal. These
observations provide empirical support to those who site radar’s all-weather performance advantage over
infra-red or optical sensors for automotive applications.
The surprising phenomenon observed during the testing was the occasional increase in return levels
in the presence of precipitation. This was observed during several collections. While the increase was
not significant, it was measurable. Possible explanations for this phenomena are:
l As the precipitation fell, the ground between the radar and the target became wet and caused a
larger multipath return to be produced. Theoretically, enhanced multipath returns can increase
actual target returns over 10 dB given a particular geometry.
l As the precipitation particles landed in the target, they caused an increase in the non-specular
returns due to increased refraction and energy scattering. For tests conducted with reference
reflectors, the increase may have come from particles landing on the Styrofoam support pedestal.
B-17
Daselme ror Rain
Baseline for Rain
052
0.7
051
0.6
05
05
0.49
~
0.4
I
)o.48
ioa
0.47
0.2
046
0.1
0.45
0 60 100 160 200 250
10 20 30 40 50 00 70 PlJse
Ar,ge
Baseline for Rain

Baseline for Rain
·:··· '••·
!·
,(
,,· 'i,
08.,. · ·
~
osr··~
"~ 0.4
~
..
:
,,
.
. •,
'
'••
....
: '•
.... ~ .
.., .
'
e ·:•,
102.L ... ·•!
~·~ '•• .., / ' 200

20
n
31 «I !ill 60 70
Ill 0 Pulses (lime) Distance (meters)
Distance (meters)
UghtRaln
l.lght Rain
07
0.54
0.6 063
I 0.52
0.5
0.4
~
io.a ,--
l~.
02 0.46
0.47
0.1
0.46
10 20 00 40 so fl) 70 0.45
~
0 so 100 150 200 250
P\ISe
UghtRaln
Light Rain
•·:· 200
•:· ·:·
1111
I' ·••: •' ...
,!
'•;. :·,
•'! 100
08 .. :
140
06 ••,: '•t
.,~.
'ai'l20
E
~0.4 .,
~100
E
:,
;; ''
.
:·• ~ID
er 0.2 ,:
00
0
0 200 40
20
ID 0 Pulses(lime) 10 20 ll 40 50 00 70
Moderate Rain
Moderate Rain
05
0.5,------T----,------,.----~---
0.45
0.48
0.4
0.35 0.48
I
0.3
0.44
~0.25
I
i 0.2 jo.42
0.15
0.4
0.1
0.38
10 20 30 40 50 00 70 0.38'-----'-----''-----...L...----'---J
0 50 100 150 200 250
Rrge
PIJse
Moderate Rain
Moderate Rain
.m
,•:'' ····:••,, 100
~ .. '
~-. 100
05
04
'•, .... ~-
~ ... :: . ...
~03 .. .
~ '••:-.
~ 02
•
a:
0.1
.m
10 aJ l) 40
mo Pulses (rims) Dislance (meters)
D1slance (meters)
Sheet or Rain Sheet of Rain
0.7 056
06 066
054
0.5
0.53
0.4
~
lo.62
io.3 i0.51
0.2
05
01
049
0.46
10 20 3) 40 50 00 70 0 50 100 150 :m l!50
Arige ruse
Sheet or Rain
Sheet ofRain
...····:··
.
.... •:··· ··~-.
.'' .. ~ ....... ' j .'... '·;.
08~,...
,•··
·••,
06
I
~04
';,.
E
:, ·• .. ,
1ii
o: 0.2
200
mo Pulses (Time)
Distance (metere) 10 :al lJ 40 !iO 00 70
Distance (meters)
Heavy Rain Heavy Ram
0.48
05
0.45
0.4
I I 046
~ 11M11lll 1M.. 1t
035~ I 0.44
03
Z:0.25 lo.42
j 0.2 i
015
.I 04
O.h I ■I 038
0.38
EO 70 0 50 100 150 200 250
10 20 30 40 50
Fmge
ruse
Heavy Rain Heavy Rain
••'
.... ;: ..
: •, .
~ : · ·.. : -. ....
. .:. •' :~- .. •,,:: ~·· '•
05-r •' . ··l.... l : : '·

··,;.
0.4 ···~. ····i

~ •'••
·•,:
.:l 0.3
~
~ 02
i
0:
01-
:~✓-'" 20 '• '•• '• -~- '•, 100 1511

20
Ill D D
Pulses (rime) D 10 20 3) 40 50 00 70
BasaineilrSnow: 970127b.rdReocxd! 1 lo 186 Baseline ilr Snow: 970127b.rd Ma>C Arun d Reocxd! 1 lo 186 Awragec().40146
0.5 046~--~-~-~--~-..-~-~-~
045
0.44
0.4
035
0.42
0.3
~0.25 I 04
j 0.2 j
038
0.15
01
038
OM"---'_ _.._ _.__ _.__..__.__._ _,__ _.___,

10 20 00 40 50 00 70 o 20 40 oo oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m
Ar09 PI.ISe
Ugt Snow: 970127c.rd Reocxd! 1 to 186

0.45 Ugt Snow: 970127c.rd Ma>C Ae11111 d Reocxd! 1 to 186 Awragec().37008
0.44,---.--.--...---..---.--.---..--,.--..-~
0.4
0.35 0.42
0.3
04
~025
I 0.2 lo.38
0.15
j
0.38
0.1
OM
10 20 00 40 50 60 70
o.~.___._ _.._ ___.__....__~-''---L-----L----'-__.
Ar09 o 20 40 60 60 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m
PIAse
Snow Baseline I Flootes: 9700068.n:fAeoords 110200 Snow Baseline : 9700068.n:f Max Rell.In ol A!oon:1!11 to 200 A18!1Q£>=0 077m4
000 ow~--------.----.-----.----~
000
0005
007
0.06
0.00
005
~ I
;o.oi io075
0.03
002 007
0.01
0.066L---...J...---'----_,___ _ _.___ __,

10 20 00 40 50 00 70 0 50 100 150 200 250
Al1g9 Nse
Moderele Snow: 970000).n:f A9c(Xd3 1 to 200 Moderele Snow: 97tOO!b.n:f Max Room ol Reeord9 1 to 200 A\llll!Q8=0.<mil!6
01 0006,----,-----,.-----.----.-----,
0.00
000 0.00
0.07
000
~0.05 I
Jooi J 0.00
0.03
0.00 0075
0.01
0070;;-----:~---:._:___.,__ _..__ __J
10 :20 00 40 50 00 70 50 100 100 200 250
Al1g9 Pllse
Healy Snow: 970127d.rd Aaoorm 1 to 195 Healy Snow: 910127d.rd MIii< R!ltm ci Aecords 110195 A,aage,0.33818
0.4 0.4.-----.--.......-..--........--.--...--..---.---,
0.35
0.38
0.3'
0.36
0.25
~ 0.2 1034
i 0.15
i
0.32
0.1
0.3
028'---'--....._..____...,__.__....._ _.____..___.__ _,
10 20 00 40 50 00 70 o 20 40 oo oo ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~
ADJII l'IJse
Baseline 2: 9703111.nf Max Retum d Aeoord3 1 to 400 Awmgec().38919
Baseline 2: 970318.nf Recordl 1 to 400 O.~r--r--r--r--r---.---r----,----r----,
0.4
0.300
0.36
0.3
0.25
:E 0.2
j
0.15
0.335
0.1
0.36
0.365,__---',__---''------'--'---'---'---'---'---'
0 50 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 400 ~
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 ruse
R¥lge
Bl:Eellne kll' Rg 970018 rd AecoRB 1 to 200 Bl:Eellnekll'Fog 970018.rdM!Dc Aeltmd AecortS 1 lo200A\fllllg8=0.38867
04 0 3 9 8 , - - - - , - - - - , . . - - -......- - - - , - - - ~
035 0398
03 0394
0.25 0.392
~ 02 I o.oo
I 0.15 ta
0.1 o.a
0384
0.382L----'----...L-----''-----'----J
10 00 30 40 50 eo 70 0 50 100 150 200 250
lmge Ptlse
Fog 1: 971X31q.rd Recads 1 to:200 Fog 1: 971X31q rd M!Dc Aeltm d A9coRB 1 to 200 A~.36621
0.4 04,----,----,,----...----.---~
0.35
0.3:1
0.3
0.38
0.25
~ 02 lo.37
J0.15
I
0.36
0.1
035
o.~..__--~------~~--~--~
10 m 30 40 00 8) 70 0 50 100 150 :m 250
lmge PIJse
Fog 2: 117W1fJ< rd Max Alltm cf Records 1 lo 500 A\Q(l9COldl 200o600):0.37483
Fog 2: 970011.1<.ltf Aloord!I 1 to 500
0.4
0.395~-~--~--~--~------
0~
0.35
0386
03
oaaktepped out
025
:g 0.2
1°'375 fil,an\
I j 037
015
0.365
0.1 038
0.365
0.35'---'---.L---.l----'---...L.--J
20 3) 40 50 ro 70 0 100 200 :m 400 500 500
10 Nse
Rlng8
B.3 CONTAMINATION TESTS-SUMMARY
8.3.1 Purpose
The purpose of these contamination tests was to evaluate how dirt, moisture, and snow would effect
the FLAR's performance. The "contamination" could occur either at the target location or at the sensor.
For example, the target itself would be considered "contaminated" if it were snow covered, or the sensor
could be "contaminated" if its antenna's were covered with mud.
8.3.2 Procedure
In general, the contamination data collections were conducted as outlined below:
1. A reference target (either a vehicle or comer reflector) was placed within the FLAR's field-of-
view at nominally a 10 to 30 meter range.
2. FLAR data was collected without any contamination present, to provide a baseline for the
specific collection.
3. The contaminating material was applied to either the target or the sensor. (Note that in the case
of applying the contamination to the sensor, a glass plate was placed in front of the sensor during
the baseline tests, and then the contaminate was actually applied to the glass plate. This was to
simulate having the contaminate on the radome of the FLAR.)
4. FLAR data was collected with the contamination present.
5. The data resulting from collections with the contamination present was compared to the baseline
readings to determine performance effects on the FLAR due to the contamination. Return level
averages and variances were used to quantify the effects.
The following contamination scenarios were tested:
• Vehicle target contaminated with snow: In this scenario, the rear portion of the target vehicle (a
Pontiac Sunbird) was partially (about 50 percent) with fairly dry snow.
• Vehicle target contaminated with water: In this scenario, the target vehicle (a small pick-up
truck) was sprayed with water from a hose. Care was taken to perform the baseline test with
already wet ground to isolate the vehicle contamination from multipath effects.
• FLAR sensor contaminated with snow: This scenario had approximately 1 inch of snow densely
packed on the face of the FLAR sensor.
• FLAR sensor contaminated with semi-dry mud: The mud tests were divided into two levels of
contamination. The first level had the glass plate covered with mud, but still visually
translucent. The second level had the glass plate covered with thick so that it was visually
opaque. This second level is referred to in the tests as "very muddy."
8.3.3 Results
A set of representative data plots summarizing the results of the tests are included at the end of this
document.
The results of the contamination tests were not what was intuitively expected. Therefore, several
data sets were collected/analyzed for each type of test and the results were found to be consistent.
Table B-3 shows the quantitative summary of the tests. The return levels and AGC settings for each
collection are provided. These measured parameters were used to calculate the "AGC adjusted voltage"
B-29
values which are then compared to determine the attenuation levels. The "Baseline" for each collection
for "two-way" propagation.
Table B-3. Contamination Measurement
AGC Two-Way
Measured AGC AGCMag. Adjusted Power
Return Control Attenuation Return Attenuation
Material Description Volts Setting (v) (dB) Volts (dB)
Water on Truck 0.514 3.906 -3.632 0.634 -0.5

Snow on Car 0.09 3.906 -3.632 0.111 -1.2
Translucent Mud at Sensor 0.197 3.906 -3.632 0.243 -0.7
Opaque Mud at Sensor 0.306 3.906 -3.632 0.377 -4.5
Snow Covered Sensor 0.02 3.906 -3.632 0.025 11.8
12.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
EITwo-way
-2.0 Power
Attenuation
-4.0 (dB)
-6.0
C
0.:.:: m
Q
'E
(1)--
-0
::,
0 ==
-0
~ 0
-
(1) 0
::, C
o as o
:::, -0 "'
:E
CD "'CCD
0 Cl)
C > "'C:
aii= 0 1i5 :::I C: ::,
CJ) 0
Q
Cl)
Cl)
~ ==
0
15 :E ~ 0- Cl)
as -as
C: i= c.
CJ) 0
Figure B-11. Two-Way Power Attenuation (dB)
Figure B-11 above illustrates the attenuation levels produced from the various types of
contamination. Note that negative attenuation levels indicate that the peak return from the target in the
scene actually increased.
The contaminated vehicle test results correlate with some of the observations made during the
precipitation tests. In these cases, a potential explanation is that the particulate contamination on the
vehicle may be enhancing the return level by creating more scattering centers through refraction of the
radar energy. Figure B-12 illustrates this concept.
B-30
A. Little energy reflected energy 1rucrccptCd by Fl.AR for uncontammatcd vehicle
FLAR
B Rc:fractlon by conta1IUD:111on parucul:ucs QU.SCS more energy to be mtcrccptcd at Fl.AR
Top View
Figure 8-12. Potential Cause for Contaminated Target Increased RCS
Figure B-12 shows how a contamination layer might cause reflected energy to become more diffused
compared to the reflections from an uncontaminated target. While this diffusion process may cause the
power density (mW/cm3) of the reflected wave to decrease, the FLAR still intercepts more power per unit
area (i.e., the receive antenna aperture). Note that this explanation is a hypothesis which should be
verified through further testing which was beyond the scope of this project.
Similar to the contaminated target results were the results from the contaminated sensor testing using
semi-dry mud. These tests again resulted in 'negative' attenuation, or an observed gain in peak return
level. In analyzing the range profiles for the mud contamination tests, it was observed that the
contaminated glass plate itself did NOT reflect energy back to the FLAR. The only difference between
the baseline and contamination tests was the peak return level from the reference reflector. A potential
cause for this phenomena could be an effect similar to that described above, except that the diffusion of
energy occurs at the contaminated glass plate (approximately 1 meter in front of the sensor) rather than at
the target. Again, this explanation is a theory requiring more stringent contamination testing for
verification.
Finally, the result of the contamination test in which the FLAR sensor "caked" with 1 inch of wet
snow indicates that the snow inhibited the sensor from detecting the reference target. Note that the
11 dB signal attenuation caused the reference target return to drop below the system noise level.
8.3.4 Conclusions
The analysis of the contamination tests have identified some phenomena which were unanticipated.
The presence of contamination particulates at both the target and sensor have been observed to cause an
increase in the peak return from reference targets in the FLAR's field of view. A potential mechanism
for creating this phenomena is presented in the discussion of the test results given above. It should be
noted that this hypothesis has not been thoroughly tested and more research into the phenomena is
required. While the measurement equipment and procedures have been reviewed, the limited access to
the FLAR electronics has severely limited the ability to rule a sensor specific response to the
contamination scenarios which may be causing the unanticipated observations.
Not withstanding the explanation for the observed phenomena, the primary conclusion from these
tests is that both target and sensor contamination from rain, snow, and mud may cause return levels from
targets in the scene to actually increase. This would of course add to the robustness of the automotive
B-31
radar in detecting objects at non-specular aspect angles, however, the mechanism causing this
phenomena needs to be more clearly understood.
Conversely, the snow-covered sensor tests indicate that certain contaminants could cause severe
degradation in sensor performance to the point of missing significant targets-within the scene.
B-32
Baseline tJr hlln; 971X318a.rd Mme A8llm d All0adl 1 lo 200 A ~ 41671
Baseline tJr hlln; 971X318a.rd RecoRB 1 lo 200 0.5l!~--~------~--~---~
0.7,
0.61
o.e
0.6
0.4
~
la.a
0.47
0.2
0.48
0.1
o.~.____.______.____._____.___...,
0 60 100 150 200 250
10 20 60 II) 70 fl.ls&
Alm
Qnarlralon (Wei lluck-t.b hlln): 1171X318g.rd Aecolm 1 to 200
Qmmralon (Wei 1luck-t.b hlln): 1171X3111g.rd Max Rehm d A!Oatil 1 lo 200 Alallg9=0.5140!
0.7
0 . 0 0 . - - - - - - . - - - - - r - - - - - . - - - . . - - -....
o.e 0.55
0.64
0.5,
0.53
0.4
~
f5l!
lo.a J0.51
0.5
0.2
0.<19
0.1
0.48
0.41'---_.__ ___,_____...,__ ____._ _ _...,

10 3J 40 60 8) 70
0 50 100 160 200 250
~
Nse
Snow Comamlnatlon Baseline Snow Contamlnauon Baseline ,: 910006anf Mil)( Ael\rnol Aecadil 1 tol!OOAwmge=.(1077004
911Dl6a.nf A3cxxtB 1to200
0.09 0.09,-----r---r--...------,-__.:..:.=
008
0.005
0.07
0.08
o.a;
~
Jo.04
o.m
oaz O.CJT
0.01
10 20 3) 40 60 70
0.006'----......
0
----'-----"'----....L---~
60 100 150 l!OO 250
Fu,ge Nse
SOO.VOM!ledQr.970'.Did.rcfAacadl110200 SOO.VCIMIA!dQr. 1171m6d.rcf Max RellmdAllcam 1 to200Alllf!lg8=0.18l!l87
0.12 0.115,----,----.----r------,-----,
0.11
01
0.100
0.00 0.1
:Eo.08
i
0.04 0.085
008
0.076
0.07.__ _........_ ___..__ _....__ __._ ____,

10 20 00 40 50 m 70 0 50 100 150 200 250
RwVl Nae
SOO.VCIMIA!d QrfSalsor: 97t006e.rcf fB:olm 1 10200

0.07 S'lowOMreclQrfSensor. 97t006e.rcf Max ~tmdAllcam 1 tol!OOA~.003972
0.0891----------~------~
0.08 0.088
0.08 0.067
0086
004
:E
)o.m
0.12
0.01
" 0082
0.081~--_.__ _ __.,__ _ _...__ __.__ _ _J

10 3) 00 40 50 eo 70
0 50 100 150 200 250
RwVl
l'IJse
Baseline l:lr MJd Onsniraloo: 98:01:f.rd Recorcll 1 to 190 Baseline l:lr MJd Onemrelioo: 98:013.rd Max Alltrn cl Aeoordl 1 to 190 A\llll!ge'O 16165
02 0.195.----.e-----.--r--.--~-~-.------.--.--~
0.18
0.16 0.19
014
012 0.100
~ 0.1 I
too I o.1a
006
0.04 0175
0.17'---''------'--L-...L--L---'--L---'-....I.--'
10 20 30 40 60 80 70 0 20 40 80 00 ~ ~ W ® W l!OO
Fmge ruse
3500
:m:,i
25(X)
200)
1600
100J
600i
...
0
0 100 l!OO :m 400 600 W)
-----
M.d:tfQJllariraf(Jlel &nsor. 60031:Jtltf Alcclrdi 110100 Mdt(Ommlllllai el &insClr: 88:nlihnf Mac Rsli,nd ROOom; 1 to 190A~1974
0.25
0206---~--------------
0.2()4
0.2 0.2(l!
0.2
0.16 0.198
~ io.100
i 0.1 j 0.194
0.111!
O.t6 0.19
0.11!8
0.11!6;'----'-....L--'--'----'---_.__.____,__ _,
10 20 00 40 60 llO 70 o m ~ oo oo m ~ ~ ~ ~ 200
~ Nse
00001
i
I
I
0000
a;oo
I
I
I
200)
1500
100)
I
I
I
I
500'
0 100 200 :m 400 600 flOO
/e,;y Mu;,, Qrterrirellen Ill Sensor. 98l31&n.llf Max ~ d Aecorcb 1 to 190 Awreg8=0 :JJJo1 Ve,;y Mu;,, Onlll'lrellen Ill SenS<lr. 90031::tn.llf Aeoorm 1 to 190
0.325.----.----.--,---,,----,.---r--..----.,---..--, 0.35
0.32 0.3
0.315
025
0.31
02
lo.:n; ~
io1s
i 0.3
0.1
0.295
0.29
Ol!S6,'-_._ _.__..L..--''----'---'---'---''----'---'
o 20 ~ oo oo m m ~ m m 200 10 20 3'.) ~ 50 00 70
ruse An.le
4<XXl
1500
100)
500
0 100 200 3:X) 400 500 600
APPENDIX C. ERIM TESTBED VEHICLE AND DATA
ANALYSIS SYSTEM
To support the evaluation of the TRWFLAR sensor in a true roadway environment, ERIM has
developed an ITS Testbed System (TBS). ERIM's ITS Testbed System consists of two major
components: (1) the Data Collection System (DCS), and (2) the Data Analysis System (DAS). The
primary functions of the Testbed System are:
• Sensor data capture (both raw and processed data)
• Roadway environment monitoring to provide ground truth data
• Data reduction and analysis
The ERIM Testbed System was designed to be extremely flexible to support the future development
and evaluation of sensors and algorithms for Advanced Vehicle Safety Systems. The remainder of this
appendix will not go into detail on how the testbed vehicle was developed, but rather concentrate on its
data collection and analysis capabilities, including the type of data collected, the DCS's limitations, the
variety of processing techniques, indexing, and data reduction options.
This appendix is divided into three sections:
• C.1 Data Collection System,
• C.2 Data Analysis System, and
• C.3 ERIM Processing Software.
C.1 DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM

The first component of the ERIM Testbed System is the Data Collection System which acquires the
test data and stores it for later use in the Data Analysis System.
C.1.1 Instrumentation Block Diagram

The Data Collection System (DCS) instrumentation is physically housed in a full-size van referred to
as the Testbed Vehicle (TBV). Pictures of the TBV and instrumentation rack are shown in Figure C-1.
The TRW FLAR sensor is mounted to the platform extending out from the front grill and bumper. A
block diagram of the DCS instrumentation is provided in Figure C-2.
C-1
Figure C-1. Testbed Vehicle and Instrumentation Rack
Figure C-2. Data Collection System Instrumentation Block Diagram
A 1300 Watt Power Inverter is used on board the TBV to convert the 12 volt DC vehicle power to
120v 60 Hz power. The 120v 60 Hz power is isolated from the vehicle and provides power to all the
DCS instrumentation.
A Gateway 1486 66MHz EISA-bus PC functions as the primary controller for the DCS
instrumentation. A PC-based architecture was used so that the system can be easily expanded in the
future. The collection PC has a precision time-stamp board which is synchronized to GPS time. Data
from the time-stamp board is used to tag each set of data which gets recorded to disk by the PC. The
collection PC also has a removable hard drive which is used to transfer data files between the Data
Collection System and the Data Analysis System.
The interface between the collection PC and the raw TRW FLAR output is a high speed AID
converter and a programmable digital signal processing (DSP) board. The AID converter runs at
10 MHz to provide ample oversampling of the FLAR 2 MHz IF signal. The DSP option provides a way
to experiment with new processing techniques in real time. Under normal conditions, no DSP is
perfonned and the raw data is recorded by the collection PC for later analysis. The AID board, which is
dual channel, also records the analog AGC signal. Knowledge of the AGC signal value is critical for
properly interpreting the return signal levels intercepted by the FLAR. In addition to capturing the raw
FLAR data, it is necessary to record the processed TRW data for analysis purposes. The collection PC
C-2
uses an RS232 data link as a means of transferring the TRW processed data from the FLAR to the
collection PC memory.
To capture a visual representation of the roadway environment, a video camera is mounted in the
front windshield of the TBV. The video data is recorded on a video cassette recorder and displayed to
the DCS operator on a 9" monitor. The video cassette recorder has an on-board clock which timetags
each frame. This enables later reconstruction of the roadway testing on the Data Analysis PC.
The final piece of instrumentation on the TBV is a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver and
associated antenna. The GPS receiver serves two functions. First, the highly accurate GPS clock and
1 pulse-per-second output provides the time reference for synchronized time-tagging of data collected by
the PC and the video cassette recorder. Second, the GPS position data is used as a rough trothing
mechanism for the FLAR sensor evaluation. By placing another GPS receiver in a lead vehicle, the
position data from each vehicle can be used to help identify errors in the reported FLAR range data.
C.1.2 Basic Collection Capabilities

A summary of the DCS capabilities is provided below:
• Record a 12-bit digital version of the unprocessed FLAR IF signal on a pulse-by-pulse basis
• Perform some digital signal processing (e.g., FFfs) on the FLAR IF signal in real time, to
quickly test new processing algorithms in the field
• Record video images of the roadway environment during data collection experiments
• Record GPS location information in both the TBV and a secondary lead vehicle for range
trothing purposes
• Time tag all radar, GPS position, and video data so it can be synchronized during playback on
the Data Analysis System
• Store all radar data on a removable hard drive and video data on a VHS cassette, for
transportability and archiving
The real value of the DCS is realized by its ability to capture raw FLAR IF data corresponding to a
specific roadway scenario, as represented by the video images. Since the IF data is stored in a computer
file, a host of different processing algorithms can be applied to the raw data and the resulting sensor
performance compared. Without the DCS, the developer would have to re-create the roadway scenario
in order to compare algorithm techniques-an extremely difficult task. However, since the DCS stores
the pertinent data for each scenario, a particular scenario can be replayed again and again on the Data
Analysis System (described below) with any combination of processing algorithms.
As previously mentioned, the DCS architecture was designed to be as flexible as possible. This
flexibility will allow for the future incorporation of new sensors and equipment. The primary issues for
interfacing to new sensors are the data rates and frequencies of the signals to be collected. If the
combination of these parameters exceeds the current limitations of the 10 MHz AID board in the
collection PC, the system can be upgraded with a new off-the-shelf data acquisition or custom hardware
can be designed as necessary.
Other expansion possibilities include is monitoring brake, throttle, and steering angle to begin
investigating human factors issues associated with automotive radar. There is also potential for tying the
FLAR system to the testbed vehicle's cruise control, anti-lock braking, and supplemental restraint
systems.
C-3
C.1.3 Enhanced Collection System Capabilities
C.1.3.1 New Sensor Head
A new three beam FLAR sensor head (Model# AICC-3B-02) was received from TRW. The new
sensor represented the next generation of packaging technology, combining more functions (e.g., ability
to select one of three beams in azimuth) in a smaller package. This new sensor was mounted on the
BRIM Testbed System with a swivel mount that allowed the sensor to be aligned with the vehicle
centerline without having to drill new mounting holes or use shims.
The new sensor head was tested against a known target to verify correct installation and
performance.
C.1.3.2 Beam Select Switch
A beam select switch was provided by TRW. This switch was installed inside the testbed vehicle
and allows the user to override the beam select signals sent from the DSP. That is, it allows the user to
control which beam the FLAR is using independent of the radar operating mode.
C.1.3.3 Real Time DGPS Link
The Global Position System (GPS) is a satellite-based navigation system operated and maintained by
the U.S. Department of Defense. GPS consists of a constellation of 24 satellites providing world-wide,
24 hour coverage. GPS provides the most accurate positioning of any currently active system. Being a
satellite-based system it also does not suffer from degradation due to weather or limited coverage.
Position accuracy is 100 Meters Circular Error Probability (CEP) for non-differential operation. That is,
the reported position is within 100 meters of the actual position 95 percent of the time. Position accuracy
improves to 5 meters CEP when operating in Differential GPS (DGPS) mode.
GPS is used in the ERIM TBS to provide trothing of vehicle positions during dynamic testing. One
GPS unit is installed in the Testbed System and another in the target vehicle. The relative position of the
two vehicles can be determined by post-processing the data from the two DGPS units. Each GPS unit
receives the same correction data for the given set of satellites via the differential link. This being the
case, the relative accuracy of the two units should be much better than the 5 meters absolute accuracy
specified for each unit.
The differential unit installed in the Testbed System is a Trimble Navigation SVeeSix PLUS XT
DGPS. The unit consists of a receiver module and a magnetic mount antenna. The system is integrated
with the Data Collection System as shown in Figure C-3.
C-4
II ~ ~
C.,8:utay
Tnmble
Daa!-Post
5<n>I D:11> Lmlc Accqpoant
SVct S1x
0
FMDGPS
DGPS
R=vcr
Scr,:,1O:u.Lmlc
r---------.. ----·------------ '

lf;d
Conccuon Computer
COAX Anterm.3. 1.ml:

GPSAntcnn:1
: MountcdonRootorVduclc :
Figure C-3. The DGPS System
Upon power-up the GPS unit starts to search for satellites. The unit is designed to ensure that at least
three satellites are found within the first two minutes of power-up. As soon as three satellites are found
the unit starts to calculate an initial position fix. Typically the first position fix will occur in less than
5 minutes.
Differential operation is provided via an ACC-Q-POINT FM subcarrier receiver. The ACC-Q-
POINT data is provided by a subscription service which ERIM has acquired. Upon power-up, the
differential receiver module starts a search for correction data from an FM radio station that, as a
subscription service, carries the differential correction parameters in a sub-band. The receiver then
decodes the correction data and then transmits the data via a serial data link to the Trimble S-Vee-Six
GPS receiver. If no differential correction sub-bands are found the unit defaults to a non-differential
operating mode.
Position data (latitude and longitude in WGS-84 datum) is output to the collection computer twice
per second (2 Hz). Velocity data is also output to the collection computer at a 2 Hz rate. Both the
velocity and position data are time stamped with GPS time and store on the collection computer hard
disk. GPS time stamps differ from Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) by a slowly varying constant.
The equation describing this difference is:
UTC =GPS(time)--GPS/UTC(offset)
The GPS/UTC(offset) was 10 seconds as of August 1994. This offset increases by 1 second
approximately every 18 months.
A duplicate GPS/DGPS system is located in a secondary vehicle and the location is recorded on a
laptop PC. This secondary vehicle is used in conjunction with the testbed vehicle to run orchestrated
tests. The GPS information from each vehicle is then used to provide truthing data against which the
FLAR performance can be compared. See Appendix D for more on DGPS trothing.
C.1.4 Collection Software

The collection PC runs a DOS-based application that collects data from all the devices shown in
Figure C-2. The DOS-based application runs in real-time and provides a menu-driven user interface.
The operator has complete control over the data collection parameters. The operator also has options
which allow for system as well as FLAR performance testing. This allows verification of system
operation and FLAR baselining characterization before and after each collection run.
C-5
The flow diagram in Figure C-4 describes the data collection software processes. Once all the
devices have been properly configured and the data acquisition board has been synchronized to the
FLAR operation, the software enters the main loop of the data collection process. The main loop
consists of capturing and time-tagging each radar pulse IF signal in a seven pulse frame. At the end of
each frame, the TRW processed data is time-tagged, data integrity checks are made, and the entire set of
data for that frame is written to disk. The main loop continues to execute until halted by the operator.
Slart
Acquisition
Allocate Command DSP

Dala l-8'1!11A-aeal.,.jmell to Slart
Structures Collection ThtsDfagram
RBPRIS811IS
AC0v10MHH
Figure C-4. Collection Software Flow Diagram
C.2 DATA ANALYSIS SYSTEM

The second component of the ERIM Testbed System is the Data Analysis System (DAS). The DAS
is designed to accept data from the Data Collection System and give the operator the means of analyzing
and reducing the data. The concept for the Data Analysis System is illustrated in Figure C-5. The DAS
is hosted by a 90 MHz Pentium PC. Other equipment includes the removable hard drive which, allows
data to be transferred from the collection PC to the analysis PC, and a VCR with time-stamp indexing
capability.
C-6
VIDEO FROM RAW SENSOR DATA
FRONT MOUNTED DISPLAYED IN SPECTRUM
CAMERA ANALVZERTYPE FORMAT
I GRAPH OPTIONS I
II
GPSDATA TRW SENSOR
I PROCESSED OUTPUTS
I
!CONTROL Clmiil liii50 cmil! Cliili] CiirD Ilium
I
I TlME-sTAMP INFORMATION
I
RS-232 VCR
I
I I
~ REMOVABLE
HARD DRIVE
I
I I DATA PROCESSING PC
I I
Figure C-5. Data Analysis Concept
C.2.1 Operator Interface
The data analysis software is a windows-based application developed with Microsoft Visual C++.
This provides a user-friendly graphical interface to the DAS controls. Once a data file has been
specified, the analysis program's VCR-like controls allow the operator to run the collected data
backward and forward as desired. The current position within the data set is indicated by the time-stamp
information displayed at the bottom of the screen. Video data and raw radar data corresponding to the
current time stamp are displayed in the two large windows at the top of the screen. This allows the
operator to visually analyze how the radar is responding to the given roadway environment.
The TRW-processed range, range rate and other information are displayed just below the plot of the
raw radar data. The operator can now visually analyze how the TRW processor is interpreting the raw
radar data and how it corresponds to objects in the scene. The GPS trothing information is also displayed
when available.
C.2.2 Analysis Capabilities

The first step in the data analysis process is to pre-process the data using the ERIM generated FlarPP
program. This program merges the radar data with the auxiliary data both provided by the FLAR sensor
via the removable disk of the collection PC. The output is then sent to the data analysis software.
A summary of the DAS capabilities is provided below:
• Operator can replay collected data forward and backward via VCR-like controls
• Operator can quickly index through a data set by designating a specific time-stamp OR
performing a video search to find a specific roadway event
• Data files can be segmented into smaller "specific scenario" subfiles by designating time-stamp
information
• The beam pattern of the FLAR can be displayed on the video screen as a visual queue to the
operator
• Various radar data processing algorithms can be applied to the same set of data and results
compared
C-7
Combining the capabilities listed above into a single analysis package provides a powerful tool in
perfonning data reduction, event searches, and data analysis. As previously mentioned, the real value of
the Testbed System lies in its ability to perform various processing operations on a single set of data
which corresponds to a particular roadway scenario. This offers developers an efficient way to refine
algorithm implementation and meet functional requirements.
C.2.3 Matlab Analysis Software

Matlab routines allow independent analysis of the raw sensor data. These programs were developed
for two reasons. First they allow the ERIM developed software to be checked independently of the TRW
sensor. Second, they allow characterization of the FLAR sensor solely as a radar sensor, not as a radar
sensor tailored to automatic cruise control applications. In other words, the Matlab software allows
analysis of the raw data without any FLAR DSP calculations added in.
Individual radar pulses may be observed and processed, or multiple radar pulses may be averaged, in
order to reduce the effect of random noise. Figure C-6 shows the results of averaging the FFrs of six
radar returns. The dotted line shows the FFT of one radar return. The solid line shows the average of six
returns. The averaging has the effect of smoothing out and lowering the average noise power.
Companson of Averaged FFTwith Single FFT

0,------,----.,.,,....----,.---,-------,
-5 f\
·/' '.:·'
-10 ;, . ~ :lt ;~ , :: , , ;,
rg
--15
;:, ;', :, .. ~:,iJ
,,, , , ,,_, ,i~
., ;\,\, : '. ·; :(';:; . . :'., /.f\ ·' .,.;
v,1, '.• ., ,, :; ,. , , ·•v",·;
' • ' ' ' ' I\, • , 'V ...... I.I'" ". ." ' • ,. '.\, l
-l!l I\~.';\•,,, "\:!d
a -20 •i \ ,I 11 t~ 11
:,: : "Y-~:: '';,'''\!''';~: \· :;
,: ,, ' i, ,, ·: •ii , • , , ;, : ,
.:: r,); I •v V ,l I 'I' 1' ,1 1' ,1 I I
~ r~ '\, 't ~ ~ •: ,j :: ~ ,: :: ~ :;
<( -25 ; l " j i ; ;,
"O ,' ,, • t
~ -30
"'E.35
~
-40
-45
-50'-----'----'---~---~-~
0 20 40 60 80 100
Samples (Frequency Domam)
Figure C-6. Averaging Six Radar Returns
C.3 ERIM PROCESSING SOFTWARE TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION AND

VERIFICATION TESTS
C.3.1 ABSTRACT
This section will present a description of the ERTh1 processing software used to verify the operation
of the TRW Forward Looking Automotive Radar (FLAR). The ERIM hardware and software was
verified using a synthesizer generated sine wave of known frequency and amplitude. The sine wave was
recorded and processed through the data processing chain and also verified via independent analysis.
C-8
C.3.2 ERIM HARDWARE/SOFTWARE \1 ALIDATION
This battery of tests was designed to check out the ERIM-specific hardware and software.
Specifically it checks out the AID converter board in the data acquisition computer and the FLAR
Preprocessor (FlarPP) software.
C.3.3 TEST SETUP

An HP 3325A Synthesizer/Function Generator was connected directly to the Acquisition Computer
AID board. The input sine wave was measured using a Tektronics 475 oscilloscope to establish a
baseline. The collected data was then processed using a custom Matlab program and the FlarPP
program. The data from all three sources was compared to verify the correct operation of the collection
and preprocessor systems. The following list shows the primary frequencies and voltages injected into
the collection system.
1. 10 mVolts P-P, 100 KHz.
2. 1 Volt P-P, 100 KHz
3. 10 mVolts P-P, 1 MHz
4. 1 Volt P-P, 1 MHz
Other frequencies were injected in order to find the AID converter foldover frequency. The
frequency exactly matched the theoretical frequency. Therefore none of the plots will be presented.
The FLAR PreProcessor (FLARpp) program calculates the Fourier Transform of the raw radar
returns and acts as the bridge between the FLAR sensor/collection system and the Data Analysis System
(DAS). The FLARpp program accepts as input the radar data file (filename.rdf) and the radar header file
(filename.hdr) and outputs a processed data file (filename.ppr) formatted to be used by the DAS. Each
individual return of 512 real time domain samples is zero padded (i.e., zeros are added to the end of the
sequence) to a length of 1024 and Fourier Transform by a radix 2 FFT routine. The output of the FFT
routine is 1024 complex data samples of which only the first 512 are unique. The first 512 samples are
converted from complex to magnitude samples and scaled by Eq. (C-1 ). \
X(n) = .±..J
N
l(n) 2
+ Q(n) 2 (C-1)
th
where X(n) is the n output sample
N is the size of the FFT
I is the real component of the n th complex sample
th
Q is the imaginary component of the n complex sample
The factor of four in the numerator is different than the factor of two that is usually in the numerator
because of the scaling effect of zero padding on the FFT routine. Had the data been transformed without
the zero padding, then the number in the numerator would have been two.
The custom Matlab program calculates the FFr of the radar returns much like the FLARpp program,
with two exceptions. First, the Matlab program zero pads by a factor of four to a total length of
2048 points. This does not affect the spectrum, but it does give finer gradations in the frequency domain.
Second, it averages six consecutive pulses in the frequency domain. This reduces the noise power in the
spectrum; in fact, a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) improvement of about 8 dB is realized. This is closer to
the algorithm implemented by the FLAR processing software than the FLARpp output is. The result is
then output in a graphical format.
C-9
C.3.4 TEST RESULTS
Tests verified that the AID converter is a 12 bit converter that has an input voltage range of± 1 Volt
(i.e., 2 Volts P-P). The AID converter samples at a 10 MHz rate. The collection software saves every
other sample (i.e., it down-samples the data by a factor of two) without any anti-alias filtering. This
process is considered valid as the input data is band limited to approximately 2 MHz. However some
fold-over is inevitable, due mainly to the noise power which is spread equally over all frequencies.
Figures C-7 through C-11 show the results of the Matlab runs on both the raw radar data and the
FlarPP processed data. The plots show very consistent results between the FlarPP data and the raw data
processed independently through Matlab. The peak frequencies in the FlarPP generated plots are slightly
different from the raw data Matlab plots because the FFT size is such that there is no bin at exactly the
input frequency. The Matlab plots were generated using an FFT size twice as large as that used by the
FlarPP, and thus the frequency resolution is greater.
Raw Data From file102 rdf Zoomed m Version of FFT

lf~ata From file100 rdf Zoomed m Version of FFT 001-----~ 0.---~----,
Ul 5 ;'q\ /"\ o--~,~\---, I '.
! 0 / \ / \ "g-10 )
j-10
2
I \
,1/ 1,j·.'t r.
l -5 -.,/ '-} I 20 ~ til /\ ~ g> -20
::;; r, 'v,• . • .·,'\j'-\_{\
E ::;;- /\:'./! ~ II j' 'Ii\(\ -30
(\' \~
',I .
< _ \:, " , I I
10 30 50 100 096 0.98 1 1.02 1 04
• 0 50 100 006 008 01 012 014
Samples Frequency Spectrunfrequency (MHz)
Samples Frequency Spectrurfrequency (MHz)
-60-------'-------~
0 05 1 15 2 25
-60'--------------'-----------'
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Frequency(MHZ) [Data OownsampJed by 2 m Colleen on PC] Frequency (MHz) [Data Downsampled by 2 in Collection PC]
Figure C-7. Matlab Processed Data Figure C-8. Matlab Processed Data
C-10
Raw Data From file1'01 rd! Zoomed rn Verston of FFT Zoomed m Version of FFT
05V , ,! \, 0..-----,..-----, 0 ,-----,.j....
, ----,
~ \ } ,
~
(I) (
0 I i.1Q
.g 1
\ ; j
I
g t'1
I
~--10 ,
\t;
fos
<
J
!'.(.
,__, :f.20,,,,''\/·\
j I ,1 ,''.
'"
I./ •I 1r\ ,
g,-20
~ ,.. ,"I
r\ l
,.J\J
j';1
it"'
iy i,11l ,~
1'---------' .30 ,J \ \; ' 30 I ~ "<
00
" ' \
• 0 50 100 0 06 0 08 0 1 0 12 014 50 100 0 96 096 1 1021 04
Samples Frequency Spectrunfrequency (MHz) Samples Frequency Spectnmfrequency (MHz)
1:~. :. -~--j
·
60
o 05 1
Frequency [MHz) [Data Downsampled by 2 rn ColleC!lon PC]
15 2 25
i~~ 0 05 1 15 2 25
Frequency (MHz) [Data Downsampted by 2 in ColleC!lon PC]
Figure C-9. Matlab Processed Data Figure C-10. Matlab Processed Data
x 1o"' FFl" of F1Ie100 Run Through Fla!PP FFT or F1Ie101 Run Through Flal1'P
5 05,-------------,
PeakFreqoency: 978KhZ I Peak Frequency= 97 8 KhZ
04
i
,::.3
m
'O
i2
I
!02 \
~02
<., i
E I @' '
< '
J
'~ Frequency [MHz)
.
- __...,.,2s
00L.:~o::.s"""...,..1""'"..._,..s.....
01
,.
00"'-",,._o_s--,--,-s--2----'2.s
Frequency(MHzl
x ,o.. FFT ofFtle102 Run Through FlarPP FFT of F1Ie103 Run Through FlarflP
6 05..-----------~
\ Peak Freql!OO<'f =1002 9
I Peak Frequency = 1002 9 II?
f
I:
.J~.
00-"""-o~s,.....=,_...,__,..s-~--,.,25
\
00!--o~s~e.,~-,"".s,----::2-~2·s
Frequency(MHz) Frequency (MHz)
Figure C-11. Data Processed Using FLARPP Software
C-11
C.3.5 CONCLUSIONS
This test verified the operation of the BRIM constructed portion of the FLAR testbed system.
Known test signals were input and followed throughout the system in order to verify the correct
operation of the FLAR testbed.
C-12
APPENDIX D. DIFFERENTIAL GPS TRUTHING
D.1 INTRODUCTION
A Differential GPS (DGPS) system was used as a trothing mechanism for assessing the range and
range rate accuracies of forward-looking automotive radars, or other range, and range rate measurement
systems, when the automobiles undergo dynamic maneuvers. The typical test scenario involves two
vehicles, each equipped with GPS receivers. The primary vehicle was the BRIM testbed vehicle
hosting the radar sensor under test. The secondary vehicle represented a typical vehicle that
would be observed by the host vehicle during typical roadway driving. The proposed DGPS
system provided an independent measurement of the "truth" trajectory, that is, the true range and range
rate, between the primary and secondary vehicles. The proposed DGPS system must provide an accurate
trajectory during vehicle accelerations in order to thoroughly assess the effects of vehicle dynamics on
the radar signal. This appendix describes a test sequence to evaluate the accuracy of the proposed DGPS
system during vehicle dynamics and demonstrates that such a system has sufficient accuracy for this
application.
The trothing concept configuration consists of two vehicles equipped with GPS receivers that collect
GPS data as the vehicles execute a test maneuver. At the same time, a basestation GPS located near the
test site is also collecting GPS data. These data, which are intrinsically synchronized in time, are then
processed off-line to produce an independent measurement of the range and range rate between the two
test vehicles. Comparing the GPS-derived range and range-rate measurements with those produced by
the radar sensor-under test provide an accurate assessment of the radar's range and range-rate
measurement performance. This procedure was used during many of roadway tests conducted with the
TRW FLAR sensor. Appendix F of this report contains a number of "GPS Range versus Radar Range"
plots used to assess the performance of the FLAR sensor.
The post-processing of the GPS and radar data is performed by three software. The PNAV DGPS
processing software is a commercial package provided by Ashtech. This software produces differentially
corrected position and velocity data for each vehicle. These data are then processed by software
developed by ERIM to produce the independent range and range-rate measurements of the vehicle pair.
The final software module, also developed by ERIM, combines the two pairs of measurements to
produce numerical and graphical comparisons of the data.
Before accepting the DGPS solution as a valid trothing mechanism, ERIM conducted experimental
dynamic runs to assess the quality of the DGPS solution. These experiments were conducted with the
ERIM Motion Measurement System (MMS). A high quality inertial navigation system, such as the
MMS, can accurately measure relatively high frequency (that is, much greater than Schuler frequency)
acceleration and can serve as the sensor to measure the "truth" trajectory during high dynamics if initial
position and velocity errors are canceled. A high accuracy strapdown inertial navigation/Kalman filter
algorithm is used to combine the DGPS position data with the inertial data to align the inertial platform
and estimate the inertial navigation position and velocity errors and inertial sensor biases during periods
of low vehicle dynamics. Prior to an applied acceleration or tum, the inertial navigation/Kalman filter
algorithm is switched to the free inertial mode. In the free inertial mode the DGPS data is not applied to
the inertial data, rather, the free inertial trajectory is calculated by integrating accelerometer data into
inertial velocity and position. The free inertial trajectory is then compared with the DGPS trajectory
during vehicle dynamics.
D-1
D.2 TRUTHING REQUIREMENTS
The performance requirements of vehicle-based radar systems vary depending upon the particular
application (such as intelligent cruise control, lane change aid, forward collision warning, etc.).
Table D-1 lists the proposed nominal requirements for an FCW system.
Table D-1. FCW System Performance Requirements
Measured Parameter Performance
Range Accuracy 0.5 to 1 m

Range Rate Accuracy 0.3 to 1 mis
Update Rate lOHz
These parameters relate to the required performance of the DGPS truthing system being proposed. A
desirable trothing system would provide measurements of range and range rate that are an order of
magnitude more accurate than the measurements of the system under test. The remainder of this
appendix describes the results of a sequence of tests aimed at evaluating how well a DGPS system can
meet the trothing system requirements.
DGPS performance can be categorized based on the combination of GPS observables which are
combined to form the DGPS solution or trajectory. Five observables are available: the Coarse
Acquisition or CA code on the Ll carrier frequency, the Precise or P code on the Ll carrier frequency,
the P code on the L2 carrier frequency, the Ll carrier phase, and the L2 carrier phase. The carrier phase
information can be continuously integrated to provide a fine measurement of change of range, or the rate
of change of carrier phase can be used as a measure of range rate and used to smooth the code ranges.
Three categories of DGPS performance were considered for the trothing system evaluation. The first
category is a DGPS solution using all the observables with dual frequency continuously integrated carrier
phase which requires a dual frequency receiver. The second category is a DGPS solution using the CA
code and a single frequency carrier integrated phase. The third category is a DGPS solution using CA
code with carrier smoothing. In general, the cost, complexity and performance decrease from the first to
third categories.
D.3 DESCRIPTION OF TEST

The ERIM ITS testbed van is a 1994 Ford Club Wagon full-size van. The van has been modified to
function as a data collection platform for evaluating radar-based and electro-optical-based automotive
sensors. The instrumentation includes a Pentium-based PC, high-speed AD converters, video capture
equipment, and supplemental environmental sensors.
Three 2-Hz GPS receivers were selected and installed in the van for the experiment. They included a
Trimble 4000SE single frequency receiver, an Ashtech 212 dual frequency receiver and an Ashtech
DNS 12 single frequency receiver. The three antennas were mounted on the roof of the van above the
driver/passenger compartment area.
A 2 kilometer, roughly East/West, straight stretch of road with a 90 degree North bound turn at the
East end served as the site for the experiment. An Ashtech 212 ground reference receiver and a Trimble
4000SE ground reference receiver were set up on two known survey points approximately 150 meters
from the 90 degree tum in the road. The 212 ground reference receiver provides the differential
correction for the 212 and DNS12 rover receivers.
D-2
The following scenarios were selected for the experiment:
1. Maximum acceleration to a specified velocity, constant velocity for several seconds, then
maximum braking to a stop;
2. High speed lane change;
3. Straight segment, 90 degree tum, then straight segment.
The maximum braking test represents a scenario in which the radar-equipped vehicle detects a
leading vehicle in the same lane or adjacent lane that suddenly executes a panic stop. The lane change
test represents a passing vehicle suddenly moving into the same lane ahead of the radar-equipped vehicle
(i.e., a rapid "cut-in"). The hard tum test represents an radar-equipped vehicle that must track and sort
vehicles and roadside targets while heading into and through a turn.
The BRIM Motion Measurement System (MMS) provides the reference or truth data for the
evaluation of the DGPS system during high acceleration. The MMS, described in Reference D-2, was
originally developed to provide highly accurate trajectory measurement of the airborne platforms used in
the formation of inverse SAR imagery. It consists of a Honeywell H770 RLG INS modified to provide
outputs of delta-theta and delta-velocity at 1200 Hz, a Datum 9250-5730 Time/Frequency Reference
(atomic clock), and appropriate control and recording electronics. Some of the significant sensor error
specifications are listed in Table D-2. As an example, an accelerometer bias of 50 micro-g would result
in an position error of 24 millimeters after 10 seconds. An accelerometer scale factor error of
100 parts/million and an applied acceleration of 0.75 g for 4 seconds would result in a position error of
6 millimeters. The gyro error contributions are at least an order of magnitude less for these same time
periods. Extensive testing, described in Reference D-2, has verified the performance of the INS. The
MMS has been used in several other SAR programs. The MMS has recently been installed in the van
where it was used to record the motion of the van for a SAR experiment involving ground moving target
detection. The INS was mounted on the floor of the van, approximately in the center of the cargo area.
The atomic clock provides the time tagging for the inertial data. The atomic clock is synchronized to
GPS time by means of its own internal GPS receiver.
Table D-2. IVIMS Inertial Sensor Error Specifications
Error Source Specification
Accelerometer Bias 50ug

Accelerometer Scale Factor lOOppm
Gyro Drift 0.007 deg/hr
Gyro Random Walk 0.002 deg/rt-hr
All data from the inertial navigation unit, the GPS receivers and the reference GPS receivers were
recorded for post processing. The Ashtech data was processed using Ashtech PNAV software, the
Trimble data was processed with both Trimble POSTNAV II and FLYKIN software. GPS data was
processed to create several DGPS trajectories of position and velocity. Each trajectory covers the
duration of the day's experiment. Several trajectories could be created from each receiver pair. For
example, the Ashtech Z-12 data was processed to produce trajectories using several combinations of
observables, including All Observables, CA Code plus Ll Carrier Integrated Phase, and CA Code with
Carrier Smoothing. By selecting subsets of the five observables available in the Z12 data the second two
trajectories can be created and used to emulate single frequency receivers. The advantage of the
emulation of the single frequency receivers is to compare the three categories of trajectories with data
recorded from the same rover antenna and Ll pre-amplifier. The single frequency DNS12 data and
D-3
Trimble 4000SE data were processed to provide trajectories using CA Code plus Ll Carrier Integrated
Phase, and CA Code with Carrier Smoothing
The inertial data was processed with the Advanced Navigation Processor (ANP), a high accuracy
strapdown navigation/Kalman filter algorithm developed under the MMS pro:gram. The ANP uses the
1200 Hz delta-theta and delta-velocity data to provide a 50 Hz navigation trajectory output of position,
velocity, and attitude. The ANP Kalman filter is processed at a 1 Hz rate. The ANP Kalman filter can
use position data from any of the DGPS trajectories to align the inertial platform and estimate the inertial
system errors (this process is called aiding). The lever arm vectors from the INS reference point to the
phase center of each GPS antenna were carefully measured. In the ANP, the position measurements
from the selected DGPS trajectory are translated to the INS reference point for use in the ANP Kalman
filter calculations. The 50 Hz inertial trajectory is translated back to the selected GPS antenna point for
direct comparison to the DGPS trajectory. All DGPS and ANP trajectories for this experiment were
referenced to a rectangular coordinate frame which is centered at the survey point occupied by the
Ashtech ground reference receiver, with x-axis aligned with East, y-axis with North, and z-axis with the
Up or vertical direction.
The experiment began with the set-up of the ground reference receivers. After positioning the
receiver antennas over the survey points, data logging to laptop computers was initiated. The equipment
in the van was turned on several minutes before the test began in order to allow enough time prior to the
first run for the MMS to align. Each run executes one of the three scenarios described in the
introduction. Data was collected continuously for the duration of the experiment. After several minutes
of stationary data had been collected, the driver began the first run. A few minutes of stationary data
collection was planned between each run to allow several minutes of data between each maneuver for
inertial alignment. Data was collected on two days, July 9, 1996 (GPS day 191), and July 11, 1996 (GPS
day 193).
The inertial data was initially processed to create one trajectory for the duration of the day's
experiment. The beginning of each dynamic maneuver was identified from the inertial position, velocity,
and attitude trajectories. The time for the beginning of the free inertial trajectory for each dynamic
maneuver was selected to be approximately 1-2 seconds prior to the beginning of the maneuver. The
inertial data and corresponding DGPS position data was then reprocessed in the ANP for each maneuver.
The beginning of the aided portion of each ANP trajectory was selected to include at least four minutes
of data prior to the free inertial time and long enough to include a 180 degree tum of the van/platform in
order to refine the Kalman filter estimates of some of the inertial error states such as the accelerometer
bias states and the platform tilt error states.
D.4 RESULTS
The results presented in this appendix come from the July 11 experiment; the data presented is from
the Ashtech Z-12 receiver. All GPS data is referenced to the same rover antenna. Three DGPS
trajectories are presented, including: all observables (labeled "O All Observables"), CA Code plus LI
Carrier Integrated Phase (labeled "X CA Code+Integrated Carrier"), and CA Code with Carrier
Smoothing (labeled"+ CA Code w/ Smoothing"). The time scale on each plot is referenced to the
beginning of free inertial mode. The Ashtech DGPS trajectories were processed using both the
automotive dynamics and aircraft dynamics selection in PNAV. No significant differences were evident
between the two dynamics modes. The DGPS trajectories described in this paper were processed with
the aircraft dynamics mode. The ANP Kalman filter used the All Observables DGPS position for the
aided inertial mode.
D-4
The first series of plots come from Run 1, Eastbound maximum braking. The van was moving at a
speed of approximately 45 m.p.h., 20 meters/sec, when a panic stop was initiated. Figure D-1 shows a
10 second span of the East position; Figure D-2 shows the corresponding East velocity data. From the
inertial velocity data, the braking begins at approximately t = 1.2s and ends at about t = 4.5s. The
rocking motion of the van on its suspension can be seen in the inertial velocity data from about t = 4.5s to
t = 6s. At t = 6s the driver had released the brake and begun to slowly pull off to the side of the road
(due to occasional traffic on the road). Note that the CA Code with Carrier Smoothing has a significant
overshoot in position and velocity. Figures D-3 and D-4 show East position and velocity with an
expanded time scale. The CA Code with Carrier Smoothing trajectory reaches a maximum error of
2.5 meters in position and velocity errors of 7 mis relative to the inertial trajectory. The All Observables
and the CA Code with Carrier Integrated Phase trajectory positions follow the inertial position closely.
There is a bias of 0.25 meter between the All Observables and the CA Code with Carrier Integrated
Phase trajectories, which is probably due to the difference in the number of observables used in the
solution. The All Observables and the CA Code with Carrier futegrated Phase velocities are nearly
identical and both exhibit a time lag relative to the inertial data.
•Ill"'" 1·Run \ • Enl>ound Btakilg. EMt POSlll>ll

. . .
-640 · ..... · ... · ··,········ · ... · ··:·· · ·: · ·····-:- · ... ·-·· · · ·-:-·· · · ·:··· · ·
;-650 ••••• ••'.•••••• ••:••••••• .. _-••• ••.-• ••••••:•• ••••'• ••••••, • • • •h • • • •:••• •••
E : : . : . . . .
..,:£-660 ••• • ••;•• ••••••;•• • • • •• • •••; ••• • ••• • •••••: ••• • ••••• ••• ••:• • •••u:• •• •
:i . . . ' . . .
'::-670 · ······: • - ··- : · .. : ·-······ ...... -•: · --- ·-···- · ·. · ... · ........ :- .... .
: . : : . . . :
;-680 •••••• ••••••• •••••• :-•••• ••••••• ••:.,,,,. ,.',,, •••,• ••• ••
ca
~
: 0
•••u • •
:
=• ••• •
'O • : ' •
-=-6;Q ...... : •.... ; ....... : .... · - ~ · - - - ~ ~ - - ~ - -........

a: • •
~ ; : . · 0 ~Obwnrablos :
~ -700 •·• • • ·•·•·• ··:······ • • ··•·• ·:· y···i:::1. Codi..lrii,igiitod·eaiiiir". · ···· · ·
0 , + CACod.i on1y.,,smoollllng
-110 ··
. ·:··· .rM~1·-:-. ...... ·-:-·· ·····;. · •·• ·:·. • .
··:·· •·• ··:·· · · · :·· ······~
. . .
......·...······:·-·--··:··· .. ··-·······: ····· ....... · ............. •......
-1 2 3 4 5 6 7
TanCI. seconds (ri:ne = D a; STart at t'Q:O ineniaD
Figure D-1. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Position
. . ··~ ..... :-- .... ~o.... Alt°i)bNVii~ii$ . ·~ ... ·:· .. ..

18 ....... i • • • • i,.. ••• -. • • .• ; ••••• >v:.. •• CA.=Ccd•~Cani•S:· .. ..
: . ' :+ CA Code Onr, w'5aioothlng;
16 ••••••• :·· ••• ··:······ ··: •••••••••• ••••• rn,i,-r ... ~ ....• ·: ... ·:····· ..
. . . .
11" ..... : .... ~-- ... ... ... . ':' ......... ·-;- . - . ·- .... -- - ... ·:· ..
t 12 •••• ~-· .... : ........~ .... - • .. ~ •••• : ••• ·:- . . . . ~ ..... ; •••
!E 10 · • · ·: ·-. ....
•
~
:
• • • • ·.•.. • • :_
:
• •.•
•
• • • ·• • · .. · ...... :. · · · .:••.. ·
: •
~ e ........ :•• ...... ;,ooe • ....... • • :. a • • •: . . . O ,;. 0 OHO ....... O•O .... OoO -~- Oo,O O•
~ 6 •••• ; •••• \ ••••••; ••.•• ; •• \ · · •.•• 7.... 7...... :. .....:......

::: : :.; : : : : : : :::~ :·: :·: : :p. ·: . . -~ . . .:" . . ·:·. .
0 •••• ··: ••••• :·· ••• : •••••••• ··f. ·~-~;::...,~~~4
. .
-1 C 2 ~ , s 6 7 e ;
r•ua. secords. (Tin•. o. s,an Df fl• iM1UII
Figure D-2. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Velocity
D-5
Figura S· Runl. Eas11lcund Braking, East Pcsilicn. Expandad Time Scala
-6345 -·- ..... ··- -.·- -·- ··- - .... _. ····-······•-•,-·-. - . ··- .... - - ....... -.-·-·- -----·-
-..... -·· ··:······· --·- ·:······· -·- ··r. --- --·- ··-·· -··- ...... -_. .............. .
. -635
!-6355
E
- ---- -- ----:-- .... ------:----- -········r·-· ----·-·- ~ ····· --- - - .!. .... ----- - -
"
-; -636
.
- ............... --- ..... --- .,' ..............., ......... -- .......... - ....... ····- ..... . ,
.
CD
=-6365 - ----- ... ___: ....•....... :.................. t ...... --- - ·--·~---- .... - -----~- - ..........
.
"'s
.
~
.s
a:
-687
,• • • . • • .. •••••-•••'••••••• \ • I oooo••••
.
g-637.S
.i .... D : AD Ohserva~les.
0 -638 ·· · ···:···· · · ·--·- ······- ..... ·x :.. cA·cctfe~~t.ai;ratacica~,---·- · · ··
+·
:··i. . . iiia.-···· ; --· · · · ····r ··· ···· ··
CA Cede Oiily wJSmcctlling
-6se5 . ···· -·- · ·--;-- ····· · ··· · ( · ··•···· ··:
4 45 5 5.5 6 6.5 7
TID'le. saccnds {TRIG = O = start af flee inClniaQ
Figure D-3. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Position, Expanded Time Scale
Figure .4· Run1. Eas!bcund Bralmg. EastVebcey, E,qianded rune Scala

.. ..
.
o [. AllObservablas .
10 •·• · • · • •..: • · ···········; •..•.•.•.••~•. ~ %.~pg!J.+Jn;te.9!'3.ta.d_!:,1.m!3!.. ••.•.•••.
l \ +: CA Code 011, w/SmootlliJ!g
: lnenial
e .......... . ... . - .... ········--,---------,---~
'C
c;
..,
0
~"'
; 6 •••.••.• ·····~·-· ••• ·····-·-·-·-·-·-
I
... - .........
o
.
... -·-·-···-···-·-·-·-
•
. -·····-·· . .
............
o
.;
!:
. .
i :
~
i 4
--........ : l 1
2 •.••. ·····~··· .•.•.•.• --·--··:····· .........; .•. ···········:···············: •••.•.•.••.•.

··. ~
:
;
:
0 ............. :····· .•, ••••• _ •• )•-"••""••··· ~=_,~,_.;;;,.:::::,.....~~--··~-:1
4 45 5 55 6 65 7
Time. seconds (Tine = D = start of free inaniaQ
Figure 0-4. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, East Velocity, Expanded Time Scale
Figure D-5 shows the Up position for the Eastbound Braking, Run 1. The plot shows that there could
be a noticeable difference in DGPS trajectories using All Observables and one using the CA Code and a
single frequency Carrier Integrated Phase. This example shows a difference of 1.75 meters. The CA
Code with Carrier Smoothing position trajectory shows a curious response which can be more easily seen
in the velocity data in Figure D-6. This velocity trajectory reaches a peak of 0.3 mis vertical velocity.
The vertical velocity of the other DGPS solutions appear to follow the inertial data with the same data
lag observed in the horizontal velocity. As a side note, the slight negative velocity seen in the vertical
velocity while the van is still moving is real. According to the local terrain survey data, the road is not
level; it decreases in elevation about 3 meters going from West to East over the 2 kilometer stretch.
D-6
Figure 5: Run 1. Eas!bound Brakilg. Up Positi:m
i.!
2.5 ............. .
.
. - ............"······ --~··· .. ·-· .. ·=· ..................:-. ........... ,..... ..
.
s
E
i 2 .......... ; ............ ! ............ !"' •• - ......;. ...
., ¢ ; Al Ob~ervable,i
..
Cl)
• X : CA Code+lntegn!ad caimer .
""15 ········:········ ~ .... ••:•-·······:··· .+__; CA.Co~eontr~1Sm001!1ing .•.. ~ .•.
g
.
·l
. \ . "inenill: \ j :
.
JII
a:
CII 1 ........ :••••• ......
.
1, . . . . . . . . . . . . ; • • ••• ..
.
;•• ....
. .
• • : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . .: - • • .. • •'••••••••
.
g
.ii
0
05
-1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9
,une. s.aconds {Tine = 0 =sttrt of free inerliaQ
Figure D-5. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, Up Position
Figure 6: Run1. Eas!tlound Braking. Up Velocily
.
O
.
I
.
I I
' .
•
.
•
o All Obserlilblas : . : . : : .
0.4 . . . . . . . . . . . ~ - - · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 'I,,,..,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ --- . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ - - - - - - · - ' · · - ---·
x c~ Code..;1nregra~ d CaniEir ! ! !
0.35 ·.;:···c~·c-cae·9nt;-w~m·coffiiii~········-t ········~·- ····t·······t·······:·······
· lrr.enial: : · ; ; . : :
0.3 ....... : -. :..:. ... -· -- :- ........ ..:····-··
: :
. :······-
.' ....
.
:.. . ..
:. .:.:.
.
,0
""'
0.25 .
. .. .
..
..
..
.
..:.
.
0
"'
-;;
0.2 ····- -·~----·-···~·-·····-·}····· ...... ~.- -·- -·:·····-·-·~..... -····•'••· ···-·:··-·-·-··;········
. . . . .
;
G 0.15
... .... I
... O
.
.
........................................................
. .
···-·-··
.
. -·-
•
. .
--·--·····
..
. -·-
.
.
0
..
...... ·-·
.
.
.
.'
.. ·- -·--······-·
0 0 0
e '
i- 0.1
I
..
O
..
O
..
O O
..
O
..
O
.
0
;;
,g
>"' 0.05
-0.1 .. · ... ; ....•.•. : •... ·.; •......

... .:·-·······!····
... ···~... ······~········~
..' ... ...... ..;...... ..
-1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 e Q
rune. seconds {Tine = O = start of free i11er1ial)
Figure D-6. Run 1, Eastbound Braking, Up Velocity
The next series of plots come from Run 3, the Eastbound Lane Change. Figure D-7 shows the North
position, once again showing that a bias exists between the All Observables and the CA Code with
Carrier Integrated Phase trajectories. The data indicates that the road is not precisely East/West.
Figure D-8 shows the North velocity. In this plot, it can be seen that the sudden lane change is too fast
for the filter in the CA Code with Carrier Smoothing trajectory. Figures D-9 and D-10 show the North
position and velocity with an expanded time scale. The DGPS solutions using continuously integrated
carrier phase follow the dynamics closely, with the All Observables solution exactly following the free
D-7
inertial solution and the CA Code with Carrier Integrated Phase solution showing about a 0.9 meter bias
relative to the free inertial trajectory.
Fieure 7· Run 3. Eac.'ltlound Lane aiang4ll Nol1h Pociti:>n
Figur• B· ROIi s. Eastbound LIM Change Nonh Velocity
-144
.
;-146 .; ..... .
;
.I
• : t ··- ••• :••••• ··:- - •••• .'••••••• :- • - ----~- --- • • • • • - - • • • • • •
E
.. - . ~ - ........ - .. ..... ··- ... ·- .... ... ,.... .
~ '••·
"
0
5-148
..
"'.,
.,
g-150
.,,~
~-t52 .... - ...... ·······~--- . . .. - ...
O Alf0bumbl0$ : . . . .
i x cA Code•&°l'Wlgrated Cania, -1 •. -
'
o · ·A'II-Obsoriablis · ~ · · · · ~ · · · ·:- ·· · -- • · ···' ·· ·.
~-154 · • •·• · • ·' • • • • ·+ • ·c.tcodl> -o-nrrw·,sffioo'l>aisf · · · .; ·· · · x CA CodG:..tnv,gratQd CarrlH :' ;:
• ln4nia:I -2 t. ·::-:t;9nly.W~ll)OOJI,~... ·t
-156 - .. ..... .......... - ...... ..................... :··· ..
~ ~ ~
0 2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 10 12 1~ 16 18 20
nme.wconds tTill'le = o = startct''lree mertiaJJ raruil. 'Mlccnds. rTin• = C = start of free iruuul}
Figure D-7. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change, Figure D-8. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change,
North Position North Velocity
Frgma 10· Run S. Eastbound Lane Change, Nor1h Vcabc:ity E::cpanded llffle Scala
Faguro Q• Run 3 Eas1!1ound LartG CbangQ Nom Pos.idon Expanded r111.e Scala
;o _ All Ohuivablas .......... _ ..•......

35
-148 :x CA Ccdo+lnUligraUld Cerrier
:+ CA Cod~ Only wlSmoathmg
-1411 ,_ ... fniiiial": •........., ... - . - -
-ISll
-151
-153 ·
.
. -······· .
.................. .
O All Ol>M rvab la
-15' • . . . ........ x: ·c·;;cCidQ;1Diagra18d Cisiiir" - ..
+ CA Coda Only wJStnaatiilg
-155 ·· 1Mniai·· . ...... ··:······
-156 .: ....... ·····-·••-=-----···
2 3 4 5 6
3 • 5 6 Tlma. scconds (rm'IG • 0 • start o1' trC11'1 l11ana1)
ran. Mcords. {TinQ. o. sian ot h• intrill
Figure D-9. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Figure D-10. Run 3, Eastbound Lane Change,
Change, North Position, North Velocity, Expanded Time
Expanded Time Scale Scale
The next series of plots come from Run 6, the East to North turn. Figures D-11 and D-12 show the
East and North position while Figures D-13 and D-14 show the East and North velocity. At the
beginning of free inertial time, t = Os, the van is slowing and begins to brake prior to the turn at t = 4s.
The van is in the turn from about t =7s tot= 12s, as can be seen from the velocity data. At t = 12s the
van is out of the turn and begins accelerating back up to 20 meters/second. Once again, the data shows
that the CA Code with Carrier Smoothing has errors on the order of a few meters in position and several
meters/second relative to the inertial data during the turn. The All Observables and CA Code with
Carrier Integrated Phase trajectories show good response during the turn in comparison to the inertial
data.
D-8
Figur• 11 · Run 6. East-10-Nar1h Tum. East Pasi1ion Figuro 12· Run 6. East-to-Nonll Tun. Nar11l Pos'1ion
~ · · · ·- · · · ·- ·
-100 · • • .,:-:-,-.,..,_·""··"'···.,..·_,.,_..,._.,.._·""-~--.....""··""··-=--.....·"'··~·
. 130
. . .o All oi,....,.i,1,$ .
:x
!E 128 ••• ••• •~• • • • ••~ • ••• :'•• •••
,/•,·.,;
,o
:
•• ••••;•• • •••+ . •••••••~:~ • • • o.!.u•••• -~• • ••••
- 105 ••••••
CA Codo+~1<1gratod Canic1 :
~ • ci. ~..;;;~1ywis110odiiia :·· · ..
.
:· · · · ·t ···-~ ··
c
i 126
l!I
n••••••~ ••••••••:•• ••'•• •••••• : "'°'••••••; •• ,. ••• ~ •• ••• •: ••••••: •••• • •• •••••• :- ln•ilial . .
"'.: 124 . . . . . . -110 • • ••• •
: ~ ":'"
"'2
..,: 122 . . : :. -115 · • ... • • · ......... •
.
JI . .
. . . - ·..................... - .....- .. -···--········-·· .. --·-········ ... .
.ll
a: 120 -120 ....... : • · •.• ; • •.. • j · · · .... · ·
o; AIIObc<lrvall..:S
.i 118 x·:··cA·cfdO;in,;?mod C~mir.. ·:· ....
"' + • CA Coda Onl)"WISll'IDa"illing : -125
116 ·.: lno~i · •.·•··· : • -:
••• • •• •• • • • • •••••••• • • •••--•• •••••• ••n•• •••••• ••• •• • •••• • • • • ••• • • -1

. . .
..•••... - :······.; ••.••• : . . . . . . . . ···-:- ••• ·7' ••• -- •.• -~- ••. .
114
g 10 105 11 11.S 12 125 13 135 14 75 e e5 o os 10 105 11 11 s 12
Time, $&cords. {Tine• C • start cf free inaniaQ TIOO.S<ICOl'ds ITin•• 0:Slartaffrooil1ar111g
Figure D-11. Run 6, East-to-North Turn, Figure D-12. Run 6, East-to-North Turn,
East Position North Position
F",gwo 13 · Run 6. Easr-10-Nallh Tum. East Voloci!y F',gura 14· Run 6, Easi-to-Nonh Tum.Nam Vobcity
: . : ; .
.O.-~•Al4'MFVa~lra~ · ····-~· • •·· •'• • 18 • • .o; -AD011.....a,1M--·· ··•: · · · ··• •··
CA Co2:to+lnta~1'1d c:6rrie, : x ~ CA c~ ... 1nraGraioct C•n•r •
+: ·c1,i::~a,,0.r,iv,-s,.;.;.it,i>li" · : ··•
X ;
·+ ~-CA·cc;aaon1y~~inOoihm9.. ·:· · · ·· 16 •·• •
. . ln•ral ; . .
•••" • ••• •-- ••• • •-:- ••• • ,.-.. ••••• •h • • ••
4 •.•••..•..••...••.•.••.•••••• ·
.
·······t. .. ___ ;._ ........ .
2 ••••• , •••• , -·- • ; ••••••; .••••• ••• •• = ·····r .. ···,· ...........
o • •··. •···· - .... • .........a •••••••••••• •.'ll,pl-.. . . . ...,.:..;,;~
0 •••• :···· ••• :····
0 2 , 6 e 10 12 1, 16 18 20 0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Tilnlil.MICOndS fTGlG • o- s11naf1rGG lnGl'UQ TI11u1.wcon:::ls ITDlG • C .. S'Cl'IO'f 1'11,0 lrw:lnlal)
Figure D-13. Run 6, East-to-North Turn, Figure D-14. Run 6, EasHo-North Turn,
East Velocity North Velocity
D.5 CONCLUSIONS
The data presented in this appendix are obtained from the same Ashtech Z-12 rover receiver and
processed in different combinations of observables to represent dual frequency carrier integrated phase
DGPS solution, a CA Code with single carrier integrated phase DGPS solution, and a CA Code only with
carrier smoothing solution. In this manner, the results are all referenced to the same rover antenna. The
DNS-12 receiver and the Trimble 4000SE receiver are both single frequency receivers. The data from
those receivers were processed to obtain trajectories corresponding to the CA Code with Carrier
Integrated Phase and CA Code with Carrier Smoothing. After correcting for the different lever arm
vectors from the inertial reference point and the phase center of the other two antennas, results similar to
D-9
the CA Code with Integrated Phase and CA Code with Carrier Smoothing were obtained. This shows
that the emulation of these systems is valid and the conclusions are also valid.
The DGPS solutions using continuously integrated carrier phase observables have ·been shown to
significantly improve accuracy relative to CA Code with Carrier Smoothing during the scenario
dynamics. This is when radar signals from FCW systems will exhibit significant range, range rate, and
Doppler modulation. By continuously integrating the DGPS carrier phase, the DGPS solution accurately
follows the dynamics expected for the FCW radar system evaluation. This can be understood by
realizing that the continuously integrated phase measurement is a delta-position or integrated velocity
measurement that is similar to the delta-velocity measurement obtained by an inertial navigation system.
The selection of a single frequency receiver that is capable of continuously integrated carrier phase
DGPS offers cost savings over a dual frequency receiver. However, the testing demonstrated that
noticeable position errors can exist in the single frequency solution. The continuously integrated carrier
phase observables provide a fine measurement of change of position, but the CA code and the two P code
measurements provide an estimate of the integer ambiguities inherent in the carrier phase measurements
and help control the residual absolute position error if used in a complementary filter implementation. It
seems reasonable that the standard deviation of that residual position error is larger for the single
frequency solution using only the CA code observable. Also, the time to reach an accurate estimate of
the integer ambiguities can be significantly longer for the single frequency receiver because it does not
have the benefit of the wide-lane ambiguity Figura 15· Dual & Singla Frequency Carriar ln1'1gra1'1d PhMI DG PS lruliol R...ponMI
-110
processing that is available with two
, . : . . . . . .
frequency data. Figure D-15 shows an :!-11:5 °\·;;~:...,---":'·~·-·..:;...·_·_;~---,;.:.:--·;.:...•.:::;·;.~- -~ · -- ·; · · · ·:· ... ·
s . . . : .
example of the settling time of the dual ~-120 · · ... ; ... · · ; __ · --- ·_____ · ..: ........:........:...... _i_:-.'~ •.• t ..... :. ---···
frequency carrier integrated phase solution
and the single frequency carrier integrated i-125 ··... ;......+. ···~·· · ·. ;. . . . [. . . .~......~ . '\ ·. . . j......
phase solution. The plot shows the North m • • , • • , ,\ •
position of the van in which the van began

!-130 •••••: ••• ••~•• •••••••• • ••=-•• ••••••~ ••••• •-:"•• ••• •7n • ••• o\; nu•:• ••• •
i j . . I •
moving 135 seconds after data recording was
initiated. The CA Code with Carrier
~-135 • • •.• ; •.• • -+· ···;.... ·..;·......;... ··:·· .... .. ·...
~ ~ \i · · ·
!
2:i-140 -----------------,••••OOH O
•••'• OoO \"••• "\ ~
Integrated Phase solution differs by -ii
O
---: AD Otl~blaS; ; . : : \
approximately 1 meter relative to the All ii -145 - - CA C01:b1 +- Caniar lrn:egratad Pbasa '
oo 0•• I, O •oo O ~-- 0 0 0 0 0. . OHO O I,
\
000 t O ••" O OU O .. 0 OOo •:-•••• ....... OOH-~- 00
Observables solution while the van is still '

stationary. Once the van begins moving, the
'
-ISOO 20 40 60 BO 1110 120 140 160 180 200
Time FroS'I BiagSlirlg cf 8'1cordad Data. seconds.
error relative to the All Observables solution
reaches as much as 5 meters. The solutions Figure D-15. Dual and Single Frequency Carrier
appear to converge after several minutes of Integrated Phase DGPS Initial
data. A single frequency DGPS solution Response
would require a programmed settling time
built into each FCW evaluation test each time data-logging is initiated. The dual frequency receiver
system can reduce this time to a minimum and also reduce the time needed to reacquire and correct for
cycle slips after the periods of signal blockage that can be expected in a ground vehicle application. A
dual frequency receiver using differential carrier integrated phase processing with all observables would
contribute to increased efficiency and simpler operation of the trothing system in the FCW radar
evaluations.
D.6 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project was sponsored by ERIM through its Internal Research and Development funds. This
appendix is an edited version of the paper "Dynamic Testing of a DGPS System used as a Trothing
D-10
Mechanism for Collision Avoidance Radar Evaluation," authored by John W. Sisak and Paul K. Zoratti.
The paper was presented at The Institute of Navigation's National Technical Meeting in San, Jose, CA,
14-16 January 1997. The authors wish to thank all their ERIM colleagues who contributed effort to this
project. In particular, the authors wish to thank Tom Blessing, Bob Hrabec, Eric Batzdorfer and
Tom Chaplin for equipment installation, site preparation, and assistance during the test. Thanks also go
to William Hanna, Mike Harrison, and Tom McQuade for their help in processing the inertial data and
GPS data.
D.7 REFERENCES
D-1. "System and Parametric Trade-Offs of Forward Looking Automotive Radar Systems," Walter
Nagy, Joseph Wilhelm, IEEE 1996 National Radar Conference, Ann Arbor MI, 13-16 May, 1996.
D-2. "High Accuracy, Short Term Trajectory Measurement of an Airborne Vehicle for Control of
Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar Image Formation," John W. Sisak & members of the ERIM
Staff, 16th Biennial Guidance Test Symposium, Holloman AFB, NM, 5-7 October, 1993.
D-11
APPENDIX E. EVALUATION OF SENSOR-ROADWAY
DYNAMICS TEST PLAN
E.1 OVERVIEW
The tests that will be executed in accordance with this plan are part of a Discretionary Cooperative
Agreement with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA Grant D1NH22-94-Y-
17016), "Characterization and Evaluation of a Forward-Looking Automotive Radar Sensor." TRW is
providing a prototype forward-looking automotive radar that is intended for Intelligent Cruise Control
applications, and is the focus of these tests. TRW is also supporting the test and evaluation efforts. The
tests range from very controlled laboratory settings to the evaluation of the FLAR in actual driving
situations that can not be controlled in the classical laboratory manner. In the following sections, the
tests are defined in terms of the setting, the data that will be collected and the analyses to be performed.
E.1.1 Purpose
This document serves two purposes. First, it presents a plan for testing a TRW prototype Forward-
Looking Automotive Radar (FLAR) intended for ICC applications. The tests will be executed at two
levels of evaluation: (1) as a radar sensor (i.e., as a remote sensing measurement device that can provide
range, range rate and azimuth measurements of objects within the sensor's measurement field of regard);
and (2) as an FLAR for ICC. Second, this plan provides the basis for developing detailed test
procedures.
E.1.2 Products
Within the restrictions of time, funding and the capabilities of the physical resources, these tests will
produce quantitative measures of performance that will characterize the FLAR under a variety of test
scenarios, both synthetic and representative of actual driving conditions. The most quantitatively
accurate results will be obtained under controlled test conditions, such as those found at test tracks. Test
tracks, however, do not fully capture the real-world setting offered by freeways with varying levels of
traffic. Within the limits imposed by safety and practicality, the tests conducted under test track
conditions will be duplicated on freeways. The freeway tests can not be controlled to produce highly
accurate measurements of vehicle positions, orientations and velocities, but these conditions will test the
FLAR' s ability to accommodate complex background and traffic conditions when functioning as an ICC
sensor. Quantitative results will be presented in either tabular or graphical form, whichever is most
appropriate. The freeway test results will be more descriptive in nature. For each test there will be a
qualitative discussion and interpretation of the results with a concluding statement about the findings.
E.1.3 Limitations
These tests are being conducted with a forward-looking automotive radar (FLAR) that is a prototype-
production radar for Intelligent Cruise Control (ICC). As such, it imposes certain limitations on what
can be learned from these tests. It is intended as a commercial product, not a scientific instrument.
TRW has. however, provided ERTh'.l with access to low-level radar data that can be used to assess the
performance of the radar prior to the implementation of the ICC-related functions. With this
understanding, useful data and information can be acquired through carefully designed and executed
tests.
E-1
There is a second limitation that must be addressed. Not all possible combinations of the test
parameters will be examined as part of the testing performed under the current Cooperative Agreement.
The goal will be to sample a wide range of conditions that will test the FLAR in such a manner that the
maximum variation in performance is measured. For example, not all combinations of road type
(e.g., straight, curved), surface material (concrete, asphalt) and backgrounds (e.g., bridges, guard rails)
need to be explored to determine the range of performance. Many combinations will produce very
similar results, or won't be of any interest for the ICC application. To limit the testing to a manageable
size, such judgments have been applied in the development of this plan.
E.2 TEST DEFINITIONS

There will be five (5) types of tests that are briefly described below. Each Test Type will generally
be composed of several sub-tests. For each test, the plan will define the test's purpose, Setting,
Measurements and Data Analysis Products. The Setting will define the test location, all the test elements
(e.g., vehicles, background objects) and their initial geometrical arrangement. Measurements will define
the data to be collected and vehicle paths when appropriate. Data Analysis Products will define how the
data will be reduced and presented.
Static
The Static tests are intended to characterize the FLAR in a stand-alone, non-ICC setting. These tests
will verify that the FLAR is basically functioning by measuring key parameters such as radiated power,
antenna beam pattern, system timing and outputs (e.g., range, range rate). These tests will also verify
that the FLAR is ready for higher-level testing. The test site will be restricted to a controlled, non-
roadway setting.
Environment and Materials
The Environment tests will be limited to three conditions: dry, wet (raining) and contamination of
the radome. Various levels of rain must be considered. Two parameters associated with precipitation are
of interest. First, precipitation density is somewhat proportional to rate of precipitation, which is easier
to measure. Any degradation in sensor performance will be directly related to precipitation density. The
second parameter is particle (i.e., rain drop) size. As the size of the particle approaches the wavelength
of the radiated energy, approximately 3 mm for the FLAR, appreciable reflection can be expected. Dirt,
sludge and salt residue will be tested for their effects on sensor performance, particularly as
contaminants on the radome. The tests will be conducted in a static, off-roadway setting because the
primary affect of the environment is to reduce the quality of the received signal. Typical materials found
in a roadway setting will be evaluated in terms of their RF reflection, absorption and transmission.
Background
The Background tests will be conducted on local freeways, but during times without any traffic. The
intent is to characterize the non-traffic component in the radar return from typical roadway objects that
will appear in any forward-looking radar's field-of-view. Signs, bridges, tunnels, Jersey barriers, guard
rails and the like will be included in these tests. Both the unprocessed and processed returns will be
captured for the purpose of characterizing the background and false-alarm rates, respectively.
E-2
Test Track
As the title implies, this will be the collection of all tests that will be performed in_ a Test Track
setting. Most of the scenarios will be repeated as part of the Freeway Tests, but Test Track tests will be
more controlled in terms of vehicle geometries, and thus provide the more quantitative accurate
measurements. The road sutface materials and background will be varied as appropriate for a specific
Test Scenario, but these parameters will not be exhaustively examined. The number of vehicles will also
be limited. This removes an element of reality, but again permits more accurate measurements of the
FLAR' s basic performance.
Freeway
The Freeway tests will fall into two (2) major sub-categories, orchestrated and non-orchestrated. The
Orchestrated tests will be performed only when ERIM can significantly control the prevailing traffic
(i.e., all other vehicles will be provided by ERIM and they will follow a prescribed scenario). These tests
will, for the most part, be a repeat of the Test-Track tests, but with realistic roadway backgrounds. The
Non-orchestrated tests will be performed with whatever traffic is available, although ERIM will select
the time of day, and thus the prevailing traffic density. The intent is to determine how well the FLAR
performs in acquiring the vehicle to be tracked and maintaining track in a varying clutter environment.
The host vehicle will be driven on the local freeways in such a manner to test the FLAR's ability to
acquire an appropriate secondary vehicle and maintain track for the same scenarios used for the
Orchestrated tests.
E.3 STATIC TESTS: RADAR-SENSOR EVALUATION

These tests will be restricted to a single off-roadway setting in which all objects, the FLAR and
targets, are stationary. These tests are intended to characterize the FLAR in a stand-alone, non-ICC
setting. These tests will verify that the FLAR is basically functioning by measuring key sensor
parameters. Baseband, time-domain data (i.e., before any TRW signal processing such as the FFT), will
be collected and stored for off-line analysis. Using the sensor calibration data from Task 2, FLAR
Sensor Characterization, the raw data will be processed to produce measures of the parameters discussed
in the following sections. These results will be compared with the actual values for the parameters, such
as range from the FLAR to the corner reflector. The actual values will be obtained by independently
measuring the target positions relative to the FLAR. This can be easily accomplished because the entire
test setting is static. The comparisons will be presented in either a graphical or tabular form, whichever
is most suitable.
E.3.1 Range Accuracy

The R..AR's range accuracy will be determined by placing comer reflectors, with different radar
cross-sections (RCS), along the antenna boresight at several ranges between the specified limits of
performance. This test will compare the measured ranges with known ranges and obtain the deviations,
and also determine the minimum and maximum detectable ranges.
E.3.2 Range Resolution

The FLAR's range resolution will be determined by measuring its ability to resolve two stationary
scatterers at different ranges. Two reflectors (comer reflectors, vehicles, and background objects), of
approximately equal RCS, will be placed back-to-back along the antenna boresight. We will move one
reflector further (closer), in small steps of approximately 0.5 meter until two distinct returns can be
E-3
observed in the return and perform this measurement at several ranges between the specified limits of
performance and in both directions along the antenna boresight.
E.3.3 Field of View

The FLAR' s angular extent as a function of range for each of the three beams will be determined by
placing a single comer reflector, with an RCS of approximately 10 dBsm, along each beam's boresight
and moving the reflector off-boresight in fractional degree increments until the reflector response is
negligible. This measurement will be obtained at several ranges between the specified limits of
performance
E.3.4 Step Response

The FLAR's new target acquisition time will be determined by unveiling a comer reflector within
the FLAR' s field-of-view and measuring the time if taken for the target to appear in the output. This
measurement requires time synchronization between the input event and the measurement.
E.4 ENVIRONMENT AND MATERIALS TESTS

These tests are essentially a continuation of the Static Tests, in that they will be performed in a
controlled, off-roadway setting in which all the test objects are stationary. The intent of these tests is to
quantitatively assess the effect of the environment in which the systems will be deployed and of typical
materials used in cars and roadway construction on the quality of the received signal. Baseband, time-
domain data (i.e., before any TRW signal processing), will be collected and stored for off-line analysis.
These tests have been grouped into the following categories: Materials, Target Contamination, and
Precipitation.
E.4.1 Materials: Reflection, Absorption and Transmission

The following materials will be evaluated: glass, plastic composite, Plexiglas, cardboard and rubber.
The material under test will be placed approximately 3 meters from the FLAR and comer reflector will
be placed at approximately 20 meters. The measured values will be compared with handbook values and
correlated with the di-electric constant for the material.
E.4.2 Target Contamination

The following contaminants will be evaluated: wet mud, dry dirt, water droplets, snow (on target),
ice, and salt residue. A Plexiglas substrate will be used to "hold" the contaminant. The design will take
into consideration the fact that reflections can occur whenever a di-electric difference exists between two
materials. The tests and data analysis will then the follow the same procedures as described in
SectionE.4.1.
E.4.3 Precipitation
Varying levels of density, or rate, will be considered for fog, rain, and snow. The two-way
attenuation will be determined using a comer reflector placed approximately 20 meters from the FLAR.
E-4
E.5 BACKGROUND TESTS
The Background tests will be conducted on local freeways, but during times without any traffic. The
intent is to characterize the non-traffic component in the radar return from typn:al roadway objects that
will appear in any forward-looking radar's field-of-view. The tests will be conducted by driving the
Testbed Vehicle on freeways in the greater Ann Arbor area on routes selected for their variety of
backgrounds. The freeway route between ERIM in Ann Arbor facilities and GM's in Warren provides a
side range of backgrounds varying from grassy medians to urban canyons. Baseband, time-domain data
(i.e., before any TRW signal processing) and the standard FLAR outputs will be collected and stored for
off-line analysis.
The baseband data will be analyzed for characterizing the background returns and diagnosing any
false alarms in FLAR outputs. Under these test conditions, the FLAR should not attempt to track any
objects in the roadway scene. Any attempt to measure range, or range-rate, will be considered a false
alarm. The background returns will be plotted as a function of distance along the freeway. The plots
will be annotated with roadway features of interest (e.g., bridge abutment, guard rail).
E.6 TEST-TRACK TESTS

The following series of tests have been designed to evaluate the FLAR' s performance in a number of
roadway settings that are typical of every day driving. The primary variables are: (1) roadway geometry
(straight and curved); (2) background clutter (e.g., stationary vehicles, Jersey barriers); and vehicles on
the roadway. An independent measurement technique(s) will be used to determine vehicle positions as a
function of time. The measurements based on FLAR data, and tracking data produced by the FLAR will
be compared with the independent measurements to provide a measure of the FLAR's performance.
Because the Measurements and Data Analysis Products are very common across all the tests, they are
described once at the end of this Section.
Throughout the following descriptions, the Primary vehicle is the one equipped with the FLAR and
data acquisition electronics. The Secondary vehicle(s) is an unequipped vehicle that is being tracked, or
represents vehicle clutter. All Secondary vehicles will all be of a similar type, medium-sized sedans,
unless stated otherwise.
F.6.1 Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Straight Roadway

The purpose of the following two tests is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to ignore an out-
of-lane Secondary vehicle on a straight section of roadway. In one case the vehicle is parked on the
roadside shoulder and in the second case it is traveling in an adjacent lane in front of the Primary vehicle.
Only the Primary and Secondary vehicles will be present on the roadway.
Vehicle on Shoulder Plan View of Test Setting

The Secondary vehicle will be parked -----.-.....------____.f_..jn..,.a..,)..Positions
____...,_5.._j________~
on the roadside shoulder approximately 1/4 @ U!T
of a mile in front of the Primary vehicle. Shoulder
The Primary vehicle will accelerate to
freeway speeds and pass the Secondary
vehicle, completing the test.
----.---,,----'f ____
_____._)....s....i_______
a..._JPositions
___.T...,m..,·tj...
~
________________ ffi ___ Shoulder
- - - - - - - Direction of Travel
E-5
Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
The Primary and Secondary vehicles will be

Plan View of Test Setting
traveling at freeway speeds in adjacent lanes and in
------=,,......---==-"-F1....
·n...,a.....,JP0sitions
approximately the same positions at the start of the TBD r.::7
-----•L.Li
test. The Primary vehicle will maintain a constant ----------------------
speed and the Secondary vehicle will accelerate for
a short period of time until it has reached a
specifiedistance in front of the Primary vehicle. At
this time, the Secondary vehicle will reduce its
_______i_____
________________ @ ---
· 1.1.Pos1t1ons
u.w·....
speed to that of the Primary vehicle and both

vehicles will maintain this headway for a specified m
time. The test will terminate after the two vehicles - - - - - - Direction of Travel
have traveled at the constant headway for the
required time.
E.6.2 Braking Secondary

Vehicle-Straight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the
[sJ __TB_D_F__ rn
------=--=,-----==---E-io-a__.IPositions
Primary vehicle's response to a Secondary vehicle

braking after the Primary vehicle had been tracking
the Secondary vehicle. The test begins after the
Primary and Secondary vehicles are maintaining a
constant headway and speed. The Secondary
t
_ _ _ _ _ _ _...,..._ _ _ _J.,..n..,.jt..,.ia...J Positions
_____ m __ .:~ 0
~ ___ m __ _
vehicle will then brake moderately. The test will
tenninate after the Primary vehicle has reduced
headway by a predetermined amount. Direction of Travel
E.6.3 Out-of-Lane Vehicle

Clutter~traight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to track the in-lane Secondary
vehicle when there is an out-of-lane Secondary vehicle that should be ignored. The test begins with the
Primary vehicle maintaining a constant Plan View of Test Setting
headway from the in-lane Secondary Final Positions
vehicle, and an out-of-lane Secondary
vehicle next to the Primary vehicle. The
Primary and Secondary vehicles maintain
their lane positions throughout the test.
The Primary and in-lane Secondary
vehicles maintain their initial headway.
The out-of-lane Secondary vehicle then
t !
@Il~I!J
Initial Positions
accelerates to a position in front of the

Primary vehicle and then maintains this
@]
Direction of Travel
position for the remainder of the test. The
test will terminate after the out-of-lane Secondary vehicle has maintained a stable headway.
E-6
E.6.4 Intentional Lane Changes-Straight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to detect cha11ges introduced by
vehicle lane changes. Response time is also an important performance parameter that will be monitored.
Only the Primary and Secondary vehicles will be
present on the freeway. In the first test, the Plan View of Test Setting
Final Positions
Primary vehicle changes its lane to pass the
Secondary vehicle. In the second test, the III
- - - - @ ~ - ..... ------
ff:
Secondary vehicle moves out of the Primary
r
vehicle's lane.
Primary Passes Secondary Initial Positions
The test begins with the Primary vehicle

_______ m_~~°?- m ______ _
maintaining a constant headway from the in-lane
- - - - Direction of Travel
Secondary vehicle. The Primary vehicle then
accelerates moderately and changes its lane to pass the Secondary vehicle. The test will terminate after
the Primary vehicle passes the Secondary vehicle.
Secondary Leaves Lane Plan View of Test Setting

Final Positions
The test begins with the Primary vehicle \~.: [II
maintaining a constant headway from the in-lane ---------mp--- TBD-1 - - - , - - - - - -
Secondary vehicle. The Secondary vehicle

accelerates moderately and changes its lane, then
decelerates so that its final headway in the
adjacent lane is the same as before. The test will
terminate after the Secondary vehicle has
achieved and maintained the original headway.
E.6.5 Tracking New

--------------
' Positions
------------~-~~~- @ ______ _
Direction of Travel
Initial
Secondary-Straight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine
the Primary vehicle's ability to detect
1!03
changes produced by a vehicle leaving its
path and exposing a new vehicle in the -+I I+- EuaJ fn<;itioos
Primary vehicle's path. The test begins with @] }_( IT]
the Primary vehicle maintaining a constant
---~ 7----------------
headway from the first Secondary vehicle,
and the first Secondary vehicle maintaining a
constant headway from the second
Secondary vehicle. The headways will be
selected so that their sum is well within the
1
_____ @} ~@:I ~I]] ____ _
Initial Po;itions
maximum range performance of the FLAR.

The Primary and second Secondary vehicles
maintain a constant speed throughout the •◄--- Directicn of Travel
test. The first Secondary then accelerates, changes its lane and assumes its final position in the adjacent
lane, in front of the second Secondary vehicle. The test will terminate when the first Secondary vehicle
has achieved its final position.
E-7
E.6.6 Tracking With a Cut-in-Straight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to detect ch~ges produced by a
vehicle entering its path. The test begins with the Primary vehicle maintaining a constant headway from
the first Secondary vehicle, with the Plan View of Test Setting
second Secondary vehicle adjacent to the
Primary vehicle and traveling at the same -----------==-_Fi_m_al_Positions
speed. The headway will be selected that [ill~@TI~[II
is within the FLAR' s maximum operating ----- ---- --- -- --~~-~i=- -- -- -
range, large enough that a third vehicle can
safely enter and operate in it. The Primary
and first Secondary vehicles will maintain ________i--=_______ I_n__
in....
·a1_Positions
their relative positions throughout the test. ____________ fill~[}] ______ _
The second Secondary vehicle will
accelerate and move into the right-hand
- - - - Direction of Travel
lane between the other two vehicles. The
final headways will be selected for safe operation within the FLAR' s minimum operating range. The test
will terminate when the three vehicles have achieved the designated headways.
E.6.7 Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range-Straight Roadway

The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to acquire and maintain track on
a fixed Secondary vehicle (i.e., the in-lane vehicle) in the presence of another in-lane Secondary vehicle,
but at a greater range. This tests the FLAR's
ability to discriminate vehicles in the same lane, 8an View of Test Setting
but with varying RCS and range. The closer
Secondary vehicle will be a motorcycle. The r.:-, 'JBD.2 l"'fiiM 'JBD.l r;:;-1
L:!..J ~ i.::::J +-+- L.!J
clutter vehicle will have a radar cross-section
significantly greater than that of the motorcycle.
----~---=--- -----=.f.:
The FLAR should detect and maintain track on
the motorcycle and ignore the presence of the
clutter vehicle. The test begins with the
motorcycle and clutter Secondary vehicle in the
adjacent lane to the Primary, with all the vehicles
traveling at the same speed. The motorcycle then
accelerates and moves into the Primary vehicle's t
lane in front of the Primary vehicle. The clutter
Secondary vehicle then accelerates, moves into
- -- -- - - -:- - -- --- -
the same lane in front of the motorcycle. The
- - - Du?aiaicfTta\el
headways will be selected for safe operation the
maximum operating range of the FLAR. The test will terminate after the three vehicles have maintained
the indicated positions for a specified time.
E-8
E.6.8 Vehicle Clutter in Azimuth-Straight Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to maintain ~ack on a fixed
Secondary vehicle in its lane within a vehicle-cluttered environment (i.e., vehicles in adjacent lanes).
This tests the FLAR' s ability to Plan View of Test Setting
discriminate between in-lane and out-of-
Ana) PoSitions
lane vehicles. The two out-of-lane =:~;:--.[§]
Secondary vehicles will be selected to ~ ,C TBD )I, [Ij
have radar cross-sections slightly greater
than that of the in-lane Secondary vehicle.
l
The test begins with the Primary vehicle
maintaining a constant headway from the
in-lane Secondary vehicle, out-of-lane ------=m=tennedi==·&ePasitions
Secondary vehicles adjacent to the Primary ~ :·s::
vehicle and traveling at the same speed. IX) t(TBD ,. [!]
The out-of-lane Secondary vehicles then ~
accelerate until they are adjacent to the in-
lane Secondary vehicle. They maintain
this position, and then decelerate until they
are again adjacent to the Primary vehicle.
The test will terminate when the initial,
i
-------------rao--------
[§]
Initial Pa;itions
3:Jtt ,m
relative vehicle positions have been
achieved.
----------------------- ~
Directton of Travel
E.6.9 Merging Traffic-Straight

Roadway
The purpose of this test is to determine the FLAR' s Plan View of Test Setting
response to merging traffic from a freeway entrance
lane. The test begins with the Primary vehicle .~.
: I!!!
: I!)
,
maintaining a constant headway from the in-lane :[51
Secondary vehicle, while the merging Secondary '
I
I
vehicle is on the entrance ramp. The merging I
Secondary vehicle accelerates so that it is between i

·~
I
the Primary and Secondary vehicles, but still in the I
merging lane. The ~erging Secondary vehicle will

stop accelerating when it is in front of the Primary
vehicle; the Primary and Secondary vehicles will .~
: ITII••·
:
I
I
~ s no:
,
-S".
•
maintain a constant speed and headway, then the
merging Secondary vehicle will decelerate and i
merge behind the Primary vehicle. At this point the
test is complete.
E-9
E.6.1 O Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved Roadway
The purpose of the following two tests is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to ignore an out-
of-lane Secondary vehicle on a curved section of roadway. In one case the vehicle is parked on the
roadside shoulder and in the second case
the Secondary vehicle is traveling in an
..........
*
adjacent lane in front of the Primary
vehicle. Only the Primary and Secondary
vehicles will be present on the roadway.
Vehicle on Shoulder
'
Finish
The Secondary vehicle will be parked
on the roadside shoulder approximately 1/4
of a mile in front of the Primary vehicle.
The Primary vehicle will accelerate to
freeway speeds and pass the Secondary
vehicle completing the test.
* Curve accentuated for illustratrative purposes
Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
The Primary and Secondary vehicles will be traveling at freeway speeds in adjacent lanes and in
approximately the same positions at
the start of the test. The Primary Plan View of Test Setting *
vehicle will maintain a constant speed
and the Secondary vehicle will I
I
accelerate for a short period of time ,........... -·······-r········-·
:[[I~·---·-··
until a predetermined distance ahead
-- ""-1/;--
m-r=,:,..-- i=11..1
of the Primary vehicle. At this time, .. - ... PoSJUons
; lntermedi:ue
the Secondary vehicle will reduce its / P0s1uons
speed to that of the Primary vehicle (ril

and both vehicles will maintain this
headway. The test will terminate --~-- - In.iu:il
after the two vehicles have traveled at !ID i (!j Pos,uons
the constant headway for the specified • • Curve .u:centuated for lllUSU'atr:lbve purposes
time.
E-10
E.6.11 Tracking Through a Curve
The purpose of this test is to detemrine the Primary vehicle's ability to track a Sec.ondary vehicle
through a standard freeway curve on a dry, flat section of roadway. The test will be performed under
good driving conditions. Roadway will be
selected so that guard rails, Jersey Barriers Plan View of Test Setting *
and signs are in the scene, but tested
separately.
The test will commence when the . · · · · · · ·~~~...:::~:......:~...:~~m
Primary is tracking the Secondary vehicle in
a straight section of roadway prior to
entering a curve. Both vehicles will be
traveling at the posted speed limit and
/:>-~---·, '-
:: ~
attempt to maintain those speeds and the { , [ Guard
initial separation distance throughout the test i@J rail
maneuver. The test will terminate when
both vehicles are again on a straight section
i f ~o
of roadway. The test will be performed at Start ••••••••• •.@•..........
several radius of curvatures that are intended * Curve accentuated for illustratrative purposes
to encompass those found in typical freeway
settings.
E.6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azimuth----Curved Roadway

The purpose of this test is to
determine the Primary vehicle's
ability to track a fixed Secondary @;l-··s1
vehicle in its lane within a .----·····-·--------------··l .i
vehicle-cluttered environment s •• •.-------- lpl
l£..l IBD l;:Jl
_rs,
(i.e., vehicles in adjacent lanes).
This tests the FLAR's ability to ~m-
' ----- rs, ---------------------~----------.~.:.-.
s - .·s-~
discriminate between in-lane and
out-of-lane vehicles on a curved
:
'
/
:f'nl :
,'' D'---·
ll.J:
,' '-
'
½ I
Final
.
section of roadway. The two
out-of-lane Secondary vehicles ' ..f ./ '·
Intermediate
Positions
Positions
will be selected to have radar

'
' . .
''
cross-sections slightly greater

than that of the in-lane
Secondary vehicle. The test
begins with the Primary vehicle
: rs, :
---r-l.£1J-.--- Initial
maintaining a constant headway t,ED Positions
from the in-lane Secondary ~@~
vehicle, with the out-of-lane * Curve accentuated for illustratrative purposes
Secondary vehicles adjacent to
the Primary vehicle and traveling at the same speed. The out-of-lane Secondary vehicles then accelerate
until they are adjacent to the in-lane Secondary vehicle. They maintain this position, then decelerate
until they are again adjacent to the Primary vehicle. The test will terminate when the initial, relative
vehicle positions have been achieved once the vehicles are on a straight section of roadway.
E-11
E.6.13 Measurements
The same basic set of measurements will be made for all the above tests. The data acquired on the
Testbed Vehicle will all be time tagged to support the reduction and analysis of the data. The data to be
collected is:
1. Baseband, time-domain data (i.e., before any TRW signal processing such as the FFT);
2. FLAR processed data, range, range rate, and various sensor status information;
3. Video data of the forward scene; and
4. Site survey data of all marker locations used to define maneuver positions.
E.6.14 Data Analysis Products

The analyzed results from each test will be compared with the independent measurements for
assessing the FLAR' s performance. There are two basic types of tests: detections and (position, relative
velocity) measurements. The detection tests will examine two cases: false positives (declaring that a
vehicle is in-lane when it is not); and misses (not detecting a vehicle when it is in-lane). These tests will
be repeated a number of times to provide some statistical data. The majority of the tests involve the
evaluation of the FLAR as a measurement device to support ICC applications. For these tests, plots and
tabularized data will be presented to compare actual measurements against the true values obtained
through independent measurements.
E.7 FREEWAYTESTS
The Freeway tests will fall into two (2) major sub-categories, orchestrated and non-orchestrated. The
Orchestrated tests will be performed only when ERIM can significantly control the prevailing traffic
(i.e., all other vehicles will be provided by ERIM and they will follow a prescribed scenario). These tests
will, for the most part, be a repeat of the Test-Track tests, but with realistic roadway backgrounds. The
Non-orchestrated tests will be performed with whatever traffic is available, although ERIM will select
the time of day, and thus the prevailing traffic density. The intent is to determine how well the FLAR
performs in acquiring the vehicle to be tracked and maintaining track in a varying clutter environment.
The Primary vehicle will be driven on the local Freeways in such a manner to test the FLAR's ability to
acquire an appropriate Secondary vehicle and maintain track for the same scenarios used in the
Orchestrated tests.
E.7.1 Orchestrated Tests

The following Test Track Tests should be repeated, but with the indicated modifications. Every
reasonable attempt should be made to perform these tests at times when non-ERIM vehicles are not
likely to be on the road. The primary intent is to determine the impact of actual freeway backgrounds on
the FLAR's performance. Tests involving vehicle maneuvers will be avoided.
Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Straight Roadway
Background should include guard rails.
Out-of-Lane Vehicle Clutter-Straight Roadway
Down-range background should contain bridge abutments.
E-12
Intentional Lane Changes--Straight Roadway
Tracking New Secondary-Straight Roadway
Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range-Straight Roadway
Merging Traffic-Straight Roadway
Background should include guard rails, signs and any other typical roadway clutter.
Tracking Through a Curve
Background should contain a Jersey barrier, or other strong radar reflective objects.
E.7.2 Non-Orchestrated Tests

The above tests should be repeated, but conducted under three traffic conditions: (1) light-where
there is an occasional non-BRIM vehicle in the adjacent lane; (2) medium-where there is always one
adjacent lane occupied by a non-BRIM vehicle and an occasional passing vehicle; and
(3) heavy--typical rush-hour traffic.
B-13
APPENDIX F. TEST-TRACK RESULTS
F.1 VEHICLE INDUCED FALSE ALARMS-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
F.1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the following two tests ("Roadside Vehicle" and "Adjacent Lane Vehicle") is to
determine the Primary vehicle's ability to ignore an out-of-lane Secondary vehicle on a straight section
of roadway. In one case, the Secondary (target) vehicle is parked on the roadside shoulder; in the second
it is traveling in an adjacent lane in front of the Primary (or host) vehicle. Only the Primary and
Secondary vehicles will be present on the roadway.
These tests were designed to measure the return levels, if any, observed in the raw radar return signal
from the "non-threatening" secondary vehicle. We refer to these "non-threatening" vehicles as "clutter,"
that produce returns which are not of primary interest to the radar system. In the automotive radar
application, the Secondary vehicles in these tests are clutter because they are not located in the operating
lane of the Primary vehicle and therefore, do not constitute a collision threat under normal driving
conditions.
F.1.1.1 Roadside Vehicle
Procedure
The Secondary vehicle was parked on the roadside Plan View of Test Setting
shoulder approximately 1/4 of a mile in front of the -----,-..-------Fi,..n.,.al.,..Positions
Primary vehicle. The Primary vehicle accelerated to ---=~i-s..1_ _ _ _ _ _ _~
freeway speeds and passed the Secondary vehicle, @ CilI Shoulder
completing the test.
This test procedure was repeated a number of times
using both a Honda Accord and a Semi-Tractor/Trailer __......,__....;.f____,..In,....,iuw.·a~IPositions
as the Secondary vehicles. Also, runs were made with _ _....,l_s....i______~
the FLAR sensor's center beam active. The center ________________ [El ___ Shoulder
beam has a 3 degree azimuth and 3 degree elevation
beamwidth. Direction of Travel
Results
Data from these tests was screened using the ERIM Analysis PC software to identify data sets for
further analysis. Several data sets were selected and the raw radar returns (prior to any digitization in the
FLAR) were processed using custom Matlab scripts.
The Matlab processing of data from both the Honda Accord runs and Semi-Tractor/Trailer runs
showed evidence that the FLAR raw data detected these roadside vehicles. The Semi-Tractor/Trailer
vehicle provided a stronger return under the geometr.ic conditions of the test than the Honda Accord.
The data from one of the test runs with the Semi-Tractor/Trailer as the Secondary vehicle will be used to
illustrate these findings.
F-1
Figure F- 1 shows the FLAR signal returns for one of the test runs. The returns resulting from the
roadside vehicle are annotated in the figure. As expected, the radar initially detects’ the target at a long
range. As time progresses and the Primary vehicle approaches the Secondary vehicle, the range of the
radar returns correspondingly decreases and their amplitude increases. Finally, the radar returns from the
Secondary vehicle fall off sharply and are not evident above the baseline returns of the system.
FLAR Response to Roadslde Vehicle Clutter-TRCl RO2 (Center Beam)

: . . .
I. . ._
...
008
>006
§. . .:
.!!l Returns from vehrcle
~ 004 p&cd 0” t-wide.
-=
2.,
er 0.02
0
0 400
Cater Beam
Semi-Tractor/Trailer
parked in adjacent lane 1 5 0 100 Pulses (Time)
Distance (meters)
Figure F-1. FLAR Response to Roadside Vehicle Clutter
Quantitative analysis indicates that for the given geometries in this test, the tractor/trailer RCS levels
varied from -3 to +3 dBsm. These levels are highly dependent on the orientation between the radar and
the target, and also the positioning of the target within the illuminating radar beam pattern as discussed
below.
The range at which the Secondary vehicle was first detected was approximately 90 meters and the
range at which the returns fell off was approximately 50 meters. Figure F-2 illustrates the geometric
orientations which induced the radar returns. Simple trigonometric anaIysis indicates that the roadside
vehicle produced radar returns during the period at which it was at an azimuthal heading of 1.3 to
2.3 degrees (referenced to the Primary vehicle’s radar beam boresight).
8 =sm ·1 (2.0/SO) =2.3 d~es

8 =sm ·1 (2.0/90) =1.3 d~es
Figure F-2. Object Orientation Roadside Clutter Analysis
‘Throughout the discussions in this report, the term “detects” refers to the observable presence of radar returns from
a particular object in the radar’s raw IF signal. This is different than stating that the FLAR “locked-on” and tracked
a target. The term “locked-on” refers to the fact that the FLAR (and its internal TRW-proprietary processing
algorithms) identified and tracked the object.
F-2
Results
As in the roadside vehicle experiments, data from these tests was screened using the ERIM Analysis
PC software to identify data sets for further analysis. Several data sets were selected and the raw radar
returns (prior to any digitization in the FLAR) were processed using custom Matlab scripts.
For test runs with the radar’s center beam active, the adjacent lane tests showed that returns from the
Secondary adjacent lane vehicles were not present. While this result does not appear consistent with the
roadside vehicle tests, the difference can be attributed to slightly different geometric orientations, which
resulted in the Secondary vehicle being located outside the mainlobe of the center beam.
For test runs with the radar’s left beam active, the adjacent lane vehicles produced clear radar
returns. By having the left beam active, the FLAR’s effective field-of-view is skewed to the left by
approximately 2.7 degrees. This multiple beam approach, to increase the FLAR’s overall field-of-view,
was employed primarily to support tracking vehicles while the primary vehicle was in a curve. From this
test, it is evident that this multiple beam approach can help detect vehicles in an adjacent lane.
Figure F-4 is an example run with a semi-tractor/trailer as the Secondary vehicle. Here we see that
the radar detected the Secondary vehicle at ranges varying from approximately 45 to 65 meters. These
return levels are lower than one might expect with the Ieft beam being active, however considering that
the orientation and shape of the semi-tractor/trailer, it is reasonable to assume that a large portion of the
ener,v is being reflected away from the FLAR receiver. Quantitative analysis indicated that for the
given orientations, the truck returns correlated to a target with an RCS of approximately -5 dBsm. Tests
run with the Accord resulted in similar RCS measurements.
FL43 Response to Vehrcle in AdJaCent Lane-lRC2 R06

,40
r-. . . . . ..-‘-~“-‘-““‘~~.-....~--.~~..~...-.---..-.--.-.....-.-.--.-..-.........~..
0'
l&Beam 0 20 40 60 (me&j 100 120 140
semi Tractor/Trailer Distance
pas&gin adjacent lane
Figure F-4. FLAR Response to Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
This figure also illustrates another interesting phenomena -- the radar has detected two separate
groups of scatterers on the same vehicle, which appear as two totally separate returns. Analysis of the
collected data determined that the first return (the lower return in the figure) is coming from a scatterer
located on the front part of the Secondary vehicle, probably the front set of wheels. The second return
(the top return in the figure), which is separated from the first by approximately 55 feet, is coming from
the rear portion of the vehicle, probably the rear set of wheels.
Figure F-5 illustrates the geometric orientation corresponding to the range over which the Secondary
vehicle was detected by the left beam. These are consistent with the measured beam patterns of the
FLAR as shown in Figure F -6. The range of azimuth angle over which the vehicle in the adjacent lane
F-4
Relatively
High Returns
Relatively
Low Returns
Figure F-7. How Target Orientation Affects Return Levels
Conclusions
Conclusions derived from the experiments are summarized below.
l Some automotive radar system designers have used a 3 degree 3 dB beamwidth since it covers
one lane width at approximately 100 m (the specified detection range). These test show that
large RCS objects outside the stated beamwidth will produce returns in the radar sensor.
l Even though automotive radars may have an extended FOV (either through beam switching or
scanning), the orientation and shape of vehicles in the adjacent lanes can produce return levels
much lower than expected.
l While the return levels from the Secondary vehicles in these tests are relatively low, the specific
orientation and structure of roadside/adjacent lane clutter can produce relatively high return
levels. Quantitatively speaking, the geometries and orientations of the experiments resulted in
observed RCS levels from both the Accord and tractor/trailer on the order of -5 to 0 dBsm.
l The radar would interpret returns witnessed in these experiments an object in the direct path of
the primary vehicle.
l Threat algorithms must take into account returns from objects located outside the stated
beamwidth of the antenna (3 dB width)
l The results indicate that some form of azimuth resolution, at least half a lane width, would be
highly beneficial for collision avoidance systems.
F.2 BRAKING SECONDARY VEHICLE-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
F.2.1 Purpose
The purposeof this test is to evaluate the Primary vehicle’s response to a target vehicle which braked
after the Primary vehicle had been tracking it. Events of interest are loss of target tracking and the return
levels from target vehicle.
F-6
Procedure
During the test, the Primary vehicle maintained Plan View of Test Setting
a constant speed (45 MPH), while the target -----=--------...,............f...,,..,na.....,.fPositions
vehicle accelerated and braked to vary the range [sJ • ?Qro50rn • m
between the two vehicles. The range was varied
from approximately 20 to 50 meters. The test took
place on a closed test track with only the primary
and secondary vehicles present. Only the FLAR
center beam was active during the test. The center _____ m ________ __ _ 1.
"m m 1'itio\Positions
beam has a 3 dB beamwidth of 3 degrees in both
azimuth and elevation. Direction of Travel
Results
Several runs were made following the procedure described above. The results were found to be
consistent from run to run. Plots from one run will be used in the discussion below to illustrate the
results.
Figure F-8 illustrates the raw (IF) radar return signals received by the Fl.AR system. Figure F-8(a)
shows that in this fairly low clutter environment, the return signal levels from the target vehicle were
clearly visible above the noise floor of the system for most of the time (note that the signal level shown
in the plot consists of integrating the energy from six consecutive radar pulses). The dynamics between
the host and target vehicles are easily seen in Figure F-8(b). The target vehicle continuously approached
and receded from the host vehicle in a sinusoidal pattern.
Braking seconcsar,Vehide :mc2 R09
Br.;klng Sacond:nyVehJcle-TRC2.R09
900
800
08
700
5'06
g It::> soo
~04
,,
E I soo
0
~02 400
300
1000
200
150 0 Pu1ses(flme) 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

(a) (b)
Figure F-8. Braking Secondary Vehicle
Return Levels
The return signal levels followed a pattern which would be expected from the experiment dynamics.
As the range to the target vehicle decreased, the return levels increased and as the range to the target
vehicle increased, the return levels decreased. A plot showing the peak return level for each group
of processed radar pulses is provided in Figure F-9.
F-7
Quantitative analysis showed that the target
TRCZ ROS:Max Return of Records 180 to 980
vehicle, a Honda Accord exhibited average radar cross _.
section (RCS) values ranging from +3 to +8 dBsm. I . ’
Average RCS must be emphasized, because short term 0
(pulse-to-pulse) variations in the calculated RCS were
observed to vary by as much as 10 dB.
0
These short term variations in exhibited RCS
levels can be attributed to scintillation and directive 0
reflectivity effects. The scintillation effects are
caused by the interaction of the electromagnetic waves o.
reflected by individual radar scatterers which are Retu vol
distributed across the target vehicle. Due to the very
short wavelength of the energy emitted by the FLAR,
minute changes in the distance between the radar and
the various scatterers causes the reflected waves to
interact in constructive and destructive manners.
When the waves add together constructively, the 0'-----'----------------I
0 50 100 150 200 250
return 1eveI increases; when they interact Pulse
destructively, the return levels decrease.
Directive reflectivity simply refers to the level at Figure F-9. Peak Return Levels
which a scatterer directs energy back at the
illuminating radar. As the orientation between a complex shaped scatterer and an illuminating radar
varies, the amount of energy reflected back at the illuminating radar can change drastically. A simple
example of this effect is the glint of the sun off of a mirror.
Ability to Maintain Lock on Target Vehicle

Fortunately, these short term variations average out aud simple processing techniques will allow the
radar sensor to maintain a consistent lock on the target, provided the target’s average RCS results in
return levels sufficiently above the sensor’s noise floor.
In analyzing the processed outputs of the FLAR (which utilizes TRW’s proprietary algorithms), it
was found that the sensor did maintain a consistent lock on the target vehicle throughout the test
collections. It should be noted though, that even the lowest returns from the target vehicle were above
the baseline noise floor of the FLAR.
Accuracy of FLAR Tracking

In addition to evaluating the return levels and the ability of the FLAR to maintain lock on the target
vehicle, a differential GPS (DGPS) truthing mechanism was utilized to evaluate the accuracy with which
the FLAR reported the range to the target vehicle. During the tests, the reported range outputs from the
FLAR were recorded. These ranges were calculated by TRW’s proprietary processing algorithms and
updated by the FLAR every 50 milliseconds.
Figure F-10 shows the results of the DGPS truthing analysis. Comparing the DGPS ‘true’ range with
the range reported from the FLAR indicates that the FLAR was able to track the target vehicle to within
1 meter for the particular scenarios created during the test runs. This accuracy meets the reported
specification of the FLAR.
F-8
60 . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , . . . . _ ,
50 - - - .-
I <
... -' - - .- -
t I
-
40
G> --+-GPS Rng
gi 30 • •, - • ,• • •, - • I• • ~
- -. -
C!I -1.!lt-RDFRng
a:
20 --- - o I
- - - -
<
---- I O
- --I
---- -
10
0
C\I
(0
CD
(0
'<I'
(0
CD
co
(0
(0
a:,
(0
co
(0
CD
(0
0
r--
co
co
C\I
r--
CD
co
~ r--
co co
co co
(0 co
I'-
CD
(0
0
co
(0
C\I
co co co
CD
(0
'<I'
co
(0
(0
CD
CD
(0
co
co
co
co co
0
CD
ex:,
C\I
CD
CD
(0
'<I'
CD
a:)
(0
(0
CD
CD
co co
co
CD
a)
0
0
CD
(0
C\l
0
CD
co
'<I'
0
CD
<O
(0
0
CD
(0
co
0
Q>
(0
-
0
a,
co
C\l
0)
(C
'<I'
Cl
(0
~ ~ ~
'<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I'
~
'<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I' '<I'
C\I C\l C\I C\l C\l C\I C\I C\l C\l C\I C\l C\l C\l C\l C\I C\I C\l C\l C\I C\I C\J "'C\J" C\I
Time
R9 w/ Analysis S/W Range Oftest Implemented
G)
C)
C !-+-Delta Range [
m
a:
Time
Figure F-10. GPS Truth for R9
Conclusions
The braking target vehicle test analysis did not produce any unanticipated results. In the relatively
simple environment created during these tests, the radar returns accurately depicted the dynamics of the
target vehicle.
The actual RCS levels were seen to vary by over 10 dB over the short tenn (500 msec), but tended to
average out to a +3 to +8 dBsm RCS for the target vehicle (a Honda Accord). These levels are well
correlated to the RCS measurements made on similar vehicles as part of this program. The variations in
signal levels observed in this test can be expected to occur to differing degrees for most objects an
automotive radar will encounter on the roadway.
Scintillation and directive reflectivity characteristics play a key role in the variations of the signal
return levels seen by the radar sensor, as a result of the simple dynamics between the host and target
vehicles. In many cases, these effects will actually help automotive radar detect low RCS targets by
F-9
sporadically generating relatively high level returns as a result of glint and constructive wave
interactions.
Finally, the DGPS trothing mechanism was found to have a very high degree of correlation with the
reported range values from the FLAR sensor. In fact, during the braking target vehicle tests, the FLAR
was found to be accurate to within 1 meter for the duration of the collections.
F.3 OUT-OF-LANE VEHICLE CLUTTER-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
Purpose
The purpose of this test is to determine the Primary vehicle's ability to track the in-lane target
vehicle when there is an out-of-lane "clutter" vehicle that should be ignored. These tests begin to
address the issue of "clutter" vehicles interfering with the returns from target vehicles and causing errors
in the reported ranges of the target vehicles. Events to watch for in this test are loss of lock on the target
vehicle, returns from the clutter vehicle, and errors in reported range to the target vehicle.
Procedure
The test begins with the Primary vehicle maintaining a constant distance of approximately 30 meters
from the in-lane target vehicle, (S 1) and an out-of-lane "clutter" vehicle (S2) next to the Primary vehicle.
The Primary and target vehicles maintain their
lane positions throughout the test. The out-of-
Final Positions
lane clutter vehicle accelerates to a position
approximately 50 meters in front of the Primary
@] ◄ TBD-1 ► . L:.)
vehicle and maintains this position (in the outside
lane) for the remainder of the test.
A Honda Accord was used a the target
IBD-2telI•
•
,:isci::
t Initial Positions
vehicle and a semi-tractor/trailer was used as the __________@Il_~~ f_I!] ______ _ 0
clutter vehicle. @]
◄ Direction ofTravel
Results
Several test runs were made using the

Out of Lane Vehicle Clutter• S!ra1ght-TRC2.R11
procedure described above. Test runs were 1800l , i : \
made with both the center beam and left beams
1600
active. Figure F-11 is a data plot resulting
from a run in which the left beam of the FLAR 1400
was active and will be used here to summarize 1200-·

".;- -
the results of these tests. E
';1000
As was the case in all the test runs, returns :::
:S •
from the target vehicle were always observable '"- BOO ;
in the raw radar data. Also, the TRW-
proprietary algorithms used in the FLAR
always maintained lock on the target vehicle 400 •
whether the center or left beam was active. 200L---....,___ __,__ _...__.....__ __.__ _~ -
Analysis of the DGPS data indicated that o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (meters)
the presence of the clutter vehicle did not
cause any erroneous range data to be reported Figure F-11. Out of Lane Vehicle Clutter-Straight
F-10
by the FLAR for the given scenario. Likewise, no sudden shifts in IF frequency were observed in the
raw radar data; this would have indicated some multipath interference induced by the clutter vehicle.
Returns from the clutter vehicle were only evident during runs in which the left beam was active.
The annotations in Figure F- 11 highlight the returns attributed to the clutter vehicle; they are consistent
with those observed during tests with the semi-tractor/trailer in a similar orientation. These returns were
of a very low level and barely rose above the radar system noise floor.
Upon analyzing the video data which was collected along with the radar data, it was observed that
the target vehicle had actually drifted to the right portion of its lane during the period when the returns
from the clutter vehicle were present. Geometric analysis of the vehicle locations with respect to the
radar during the collection show that the radar’s field of view provided by the left beam was limited to
roughly the left-most portion of the lane occupied by the Primary vehicle. Therefore, the clutter vehicle
was being “occluded” by the target vehicle when the target vehicle was in the left or center portion of its
lane. However, as the target vehicle drifted to the right, the clutter vehicle was being illuminated by the
radar and thus provided the returns observed in Figure F-l 1.
Conclusions
For the given test scenarios, no significant effects from clutter vehicles on a straight roadway were
observed. However, observations do lead to the conclusion that different scenarios may produce
somewhat different results. In particular, target vehicles located at longer ranges than those tested in
these experiments would allow the FLAR’s left beam to more intensely illuminate the clutter vehicle,
producing higher level returns. It is unlikely, at least on straight roadways, that these clutter returns
would compete with or those from the target vehicles.
Unfortunately, the infinite combinations of vehicle positions could not be tested in this program. As
a result, another potential effect of adjacent lane vehicle clutter which was not exhaustively tested for
was that of multipath. Certain geometries between the radar, the target vehicle, and the clutter vehicle
may produce returns resulting from “indirect” reflections off the vehicles. For example, the transmitted
radar ener-7 may first reflect off the target vehicle toward the clutter vehicle, and reflect off the clutter
vehicle and return to the radar. The result would be a return which would appear to come from the target
vehicle, but at a longer range. It is suggested that more testing, to address empirical or simulated, to
address multipath effects be conducted in the future.
These tests also provide some insight into results which could be expected for automotive radars
which employ scanning antenna technology and larger field of views. As the antenna is directed towards
the edges of its FOV, it will probably pick up returns from clutter vehicles in adjacent lanes. The
scanning antenna mechanism will give system designers the ability to employ algorithms to help
discriminate and identify clutter target returns based on the antenna’s position within the scanning range.
F.4 INTENTIONAL LANE CHANGES-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to determine the radar’s response to vehicle lane changes. Response
time is an important performance parameter that was monitored.
F-11
Procedure
Only the Primary and target (Secondary) vehicles were present on the freeway. Two different types
of lane changes were evaluated. In the first test, the Primary vehicle changed its lane tci pass the target
vehicle. In the second test, the target vehicle moved out of the Primary vehicle's lane.
Primary Passes Target
Final Positions
The test began with the Primary vehicle w
- - - - @ ~ - ····-------
fp"\
maintaining a constant distance to the target
vehicle. The Primary vehicle then
accelerated moderately and changed its lane
to pass the target vehicle. The test
terminates after the Primary vehicle passes
1 Initial Positions
the target vehicle. -------! ~ J-~T~?- W _-- - -- -

.,____ Direction of Travel
Target Leaves Lane Plan View of Test Setting

------------------F_in_al____
Positions
The test began with the Primary vehicle :.~.l I}]
maintaining a constant distance to the target ---- -- ---mf- - TBD-1 ---1 ---- --
vehicle. The target vehicle accelerated
moderately and changed its lane, then decelerated
to approximately the same distance as at the
------=-'------"'lruaaa't1;;;.;.al=-:Positions
beginning of the test. The test terminated after
the Secondary vehicle had achieved and
____________ m ~ m______ _
maintained the original headway.
- - - Direction of Travel
Results
In general, the radar sensor performed very well under the low-clutter environment created during
these tests. The response time for the radar to react to the lane change appeared to be very good based on
analysis of the video data, raw radar data, and GPS data. The analog video collection system limited the
amount of quantitative analysis that could be done in terms of absolute response times, but the raw radar
data and dynamic movements captured by the video system appeared to correlate to within a second.
Performance was consistent over all the tests conducted and no significant differences were observed
between the host lane change and target lane change dynamics.
A set of collection data taken during a host vehicle lane change maneuver will be used to summarize
the results. The data plots in Figure F-12 are from a run in which the Primary vehicle was following a
Honda Accord, and the Primary vehicle made a lane change. Figure F-12(a) illustrates the typical return
characteristics as the Primary vehicle approaches the target vehicle, namely, the return levels increase as
range decreases. The Accord measured to be approximately 3 to 7 dBsm through the run.
F-12
Procedure
The test began with the Primary (host) vehicle
maintaining a constant distance to the first target ---------...,,,,,=---=F=m:;;;;al;:;.;:.Posinons
ITi] ~@ ~ IT]
vehicle (S 1), with the second target vehicle ----- --- ------ -- ~ i.~~-=- -----
adjacent to the Primary vehicle and traveling at the
same speed. The second target vehicle then
accelerated and moved into the right-hand lane
------,,,=-i-=~----=In::.:i.=tial=Positions
between the other two vehicles. The distance ____________ ffi] ~ !}] ______ _
between vehicles was selected for safe operation
and to be within the FLAR's minimum operating fill
- - - Direction of Travel
range.
Results
The results of these tests parallel those described in the previous section, "Tracking New Target
Vehicle--Straight Roadway." The primary difference was in the vehicle dynamics which produced the
result. In the previous the first targeted vehicle departed from the Primary vehicle's lane, presenting the
radar with a second target vehicle at a greater range than the first. In these tests, the second target cuts
into the land and is presented to the radar at a range less than the first target vehicle by a maneuver.
The end result for both are similar in that the radar performed well. Sample data plots for one of the
test runs conducted as part of this series of tests are provided below. The reader should refer to the
discussion in "F.5: Tracking New Target Vehicle--Straight Roadway" for a more detailed discussion.
Figure F-16 plots the raw radar data collected throughout the duration of a test conducted using two
Honda Accords as the target vehicles. Figure F-16(a) includes a time line of events and annotation
indicating the sources of the respective returns. Figure F-16(b) shows the amplitudes of the relative
return levels which correlate to an expected RCS of a Honda Accord of between +3 to +7 dB sm.
20 :14:11 • Begin File Tracking wtth aCut-1n-Stra1ght Roadway. 1RC2.R17
:31 16:t•
·211400
.11 1:!D
·1so1 _1111:
Accord 2 111 5, ';

center lane - 50 ::
• ax:
Accord 2 moves - 42,
toward center lane 41 - li'.ll
Accord 2 enters scene - '!7
onlett :31 <m
2000
21 Jll
Accord 1111 front of Van- :11 o

0 ~ ~ 00 00 ® ~ ~
Oisi;nce(merers) Pulses(lime)
Distance (meters)
{a) (b)
Figure F-16. Tracking With a Cut-In Straight Roadway
Figure F-17 is a plot of the GPS truth data and the FLAR reported range data. As in the lane
departure tests, the FLAR produced no dropouts or jitter in the transition from one target vehicle to the
other.
F-17
601-1
50 - - - · ,_ · ' - ·' · - ,_ - , - -· - - ,_ · , - _, - - '· - , - _, - - ·- - , - -· -
r
Cl)
40 - .. - - - .. - - - - - - - - -
I
I
I
\
I
I
•
•
I I
-
I
-----
I t
- ---- -- ---
I I I
-+-GPSRng
g> 30 - - ,- - ; - -, - - .- - ; - -' .
Cll
a: ~..., ' ' ' ' ' . ' '
-li-RDFRng
20 - ., - · ·- - • - ., · - ·- · • - ., · · ·- · • - -· - - ,. -
10 · .' - - '. · ' - .' - - '. - ' - _. - · '. · : · .' - - ·- - : · .· - - '. - : · _,
: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :I
- -i
0+---,-----,--,---r---.---,----,--,---,---,.--,----,--..---,---,,-!
0)
~
""" co
U) 0,
......
~
"""
t!) 0,
~
"""
t!) 0,
~
""" co
Ill
r:: r::
0)
(0
t!) 0
0
I'-
t!) 0
0
I'-
IJ')
;:::
IJ')
(0
N
C\I
I'-
(0
C\I
C\I
I'- ~
C'J
I'- C'J
I!) IJ') IJ') I!)
v I'- vC\I I'- I'- vC\I I'- I'- v I'- I'-
I!) I!) IJ') I!) IJ') IJ') I!) vC\I I!)
C\I 'St"
C\I
'St"
C\I
"""
C\I v
C\I
'St"
C\I
"""
C\I v """
C\I
C\I 'St"
C\I
C\I 'St"
C\I
'St"
C\I
Time
Conclusions
The important issue to note in these tests is that during the cut-in process, the second target vehicle
was actually in a position such that a collision could occur with the host vehicle, but the radar sensor
would never "see" the target vehicle. Again this is a limitation of the FLAR' s field of view.
Figure F-18 illustrates the problem in which the radar beam is not
illuminating the target vehicle although the target vehicle is obviously
within the primary vehicle's path. For the Adaptive Cruise Control
Application, the operator may actually find himself accelerating into a
collision with the undetected target vehicle. Two options for this
situation are available. The first is to increase the field-of-view of the
forward-looking sensor, and the second is to install simple
supplemental sensors which work at close range but have a wide
field-of-view. These supplemental near-range sensors could be
strategically placed in areas near the edge of the vehicle, such as the
headlight area.
Both of the solutions to this problem add both cost and complexity
to the system and require a detailed trade-off analysis. Figure F-18. Beam Illumination
F.7 STRONG VEHICLE CLUTTER IN

RANGE-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
Purpose
The purpose of this test is to determine the radar's ability to acquire and maintain track on a fixed
target vehicle in the presence of a relatively stronger (in terms of RCS), in-lane Secondary vehicle, but at
a greater range. This will test the FLAR' s ability to discriminate vehicles in the same lane, but with
varying RCS and range.
F-18
Procedure
The nearer range target vehicle was a Plan View of Test Setting
motorcycle (MC). The clutter vehicle was
a semi-tractor/trailer with a radar cross-
section significantly greater than that of the
motorcycle. The FLAR' s task was to
m .. •
"IBD-2
detect and maintain track on the

motorcycle and ignore the presence of the
:.f.:
clutter vehicle. The test began with the
motorcycle and clutter Secondary vehicle
in the adjacent lane to the Primary, with all
the vehicles traveling at the same speed.
The motorcycle then accelerated, moves
into the Primary vehicle's lane, and
maintained a position in front of the
Primary vehicle. The position of the
motorcycle with respect to the primary
t Jmtial Fb;;itiais
vehicle was varied on a run-by-run basis.

The clutter Secondary vehicle then
--- -- -- -:- ------ -
accelerated, moved into the same lane, and
varied its position from 5 to 80 meters in ◄Ill(--- Ilrectim<f"Jime:l
front of the motorcycle. The distances
were selected for safe operation; their sum was less than the maximum operating range of the FLAR.
The test continued for several minutes with the motorcycle varying its position within its lane.
Results
These tests yielded some of the more interesting results in the program. Two separate data sets will
be used to illustrate the effects of strong range clutter on the radar's response. Both data sets are taken
from collections in which the motorcycle was located between the host vehicle and a semi-tractor/trailer.
Data Set #1: Radar Maintains Lock on Motorcycle
Figure F-19 is a plot of the radar return signals collected during the test. The figure also provides a
time line of events which occurred during the collection and annotation of the respective sources which
created the returns.
The motorcycle entered the primary vehicles lane approximately 10 seconds into the test and the
radar's field of view approximately 13 seconds into the test. The initial range to the motorcycle was
about 15 meters. The motorcycle continued accelerating until it reached a range of approximately
25 meters. This range was roughly maintained for the duration of the test. Approximately 30 seconds
after the motorcycle entered the radar's field of view, the clutter vehicle (i.e., the truck) entered the lane
in front of the primary vehicle. The radar returns generated by the truck are clearly seen on Figure F-19.
With both the motorcycle and truck with the radar's field of view, returns from both targets could be
frequently observed. Occasionally, the motorcycle would be in a position such that it totally occluded
the returns from the truck. This is observed in Figure F-19 at approximately 14:53:48 (or pulse 1500).
The interesting point to note is that as the motorcycle drifted to the side of the lane, its return levels
decreased, but were still observable, and those from the truck increased significantly. This is of course
F-19
due to the fact that as the motorcycle moved off of the radar beam's boresight, more of the energy
illuminated the truck and less illuminated the motorcycle.
14:52·53 • Begin File
:531:!D
Truck m center :43 10ll

oflane - :38
Truck begins to- :35
enter center lane :33 1!D
I
:231 EOO
Truck enters scene .:18 ~
on left
Cycle mcenter:13 .ioo
oflane - OB
c;yc1e enters - .06
center lane :53:03 JD
Cycle enters scene -;02
on left
~ ~ ro oo w rn ~
D!Stance(metm)
Figure F-19. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range
The key performance attribute in this type of scenario is whether or not the radar can maintain lock
on the motorcycle as it drifts to the edges of its lane, even in the presence of the truck returns. Based on
the plot in Figure F-19, it is reasonable to conclude that a moderately robust tracking algorithm should be
able to maintain lock on the motorcycle.
Figure F-20 shows that the FLAR and its TRW-proprietary processing algorithm did, in fact,
maintain lock on the motorcycle. The line labeled "GPS Rng" in Figure F-20 corresponds to the
measured range to the truck utilizing the DGPS truthing mechanism. The line labeled "RDF Rng"
corresponds to the range reported by the FLAR. The TRW FLAR was designed to operate as an
Adaptive Cruise Control sensor and, therefore, its primary function is to identify the target in front of the
host vehicle and track its range. It is obvious from this plot that once the FLAR began tracking the
motorcycle, it was able to maintain track throughout the test even in the presence of returns from the
clutter vehicle which were stronger than that of the motorcycle.
100 I" r r r r r
80 .............-.-- , ,, ,,, ,,,,,l

, ........ , .. , ..... l
~ 60 --+-GPS Rng
C:
~ 40,.._ __ ; i
;
I
;
;
I
i
;
O
;
;
t
-;
'
"i
O
;
I
;
;
t
;
'
;
O
'
i
I
'
"i
I
'
';
'
i
I
,
t
-;
;
i
I
'
i
I
,
-;
O
·, ·, ;
t •
~. -;
I
,
·, •• "'J
O i
1
-11-RDFRng
20
F-20
Figure F-21 is another plot which contains the same data shown in Figure F-19; however, the
differences in the relative return levels can be more clearly seen. MATLAB processing of this type of
data allowed numerical analysis to estimate the radar cross-sections exhibited by both the motorcycle
and the truck during the test.
Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range - TRC1:R18

.. :·
..·· .··· ...

0.4
150 0 Pulses (lime)

Distance (meters)
Table F- 1 summarizes the results of the radar cross section (RCS) analysis. The motorcycle was
seen to vary from -6 to +3 dBsm depending upon its location within the lane. The truck exhibited RCS
levels of 20 to 25 dBsm during periods when the motorcycle was positioned on the left side of the lane.
As mentioned earlier, the motorcycle blocked nearly all of the truck returns when it was positioned in the
center of the lane.
Table F- 1. RCS Analysis Results
r r -1
Target Estimated RCS
~
Motorcycle in Center of Lane 0 to 3 dBsm

-
-
-
Motorcycle on- Left Side of Lane I -6 to 0 dBsm
-
-
I, Truck with Cycle on Left Side of Lane I 20 to 25 dBsm _J
The RCS levels are quite consistent with the measurements taken during the “Roadway Object RCS
Characteristics” phase of this program. The reader is referred to the “Catalog of RCS Characteristics for
Common Roadway Objects” for more information on typical RCS levels. The catalog is available from
both ERIM and NHTSA.
Data Set #2: Radar Loses Lock on Motorcycle

Figure F-22 is a plot of another test run made with the motorcycle and truck as the target vehicles.
Again, a time line of events is provided in the figure and the source for the returns is annotated on the
plot. Note that during pulses 1200 to 1400, both motorcycle and truck returns can be observed.
F-21
15:39:38 - Begin File
Slrong Velutle Clutter in Range- 1RC2.R18
28Zlll
:18 2llll
·41:08'ii'1Blll
E
E.
.58 ! 1600
48~1~
Truck at center :aa i:m
oflane - ·35
Truck enters lane - :31
Cyde in center of lane :28 100l
Truck enters scene - :ti
Cyde enters cent lane.: :ib&ll
Cyde enters scene~:oaero---~~-----------'-~
o ~ ~ oo oo w m ~
O!Slance (melera)
Approximately 13 seconds into the test, the motorcycle enters the radar's FOV at a range of about
25 meters. The motorcycle then continues to accelerate as the truck enters the primary vehicle's lane. At
about 30 seconds into the test (around pulse 1100), returns from both the motorcycle and the truck can be
observed. The motorcycle is approximately 50 meters away, and the truck is 10 meters beyond the
motorcycle. At this point, as expected, the returns from the motorcycle appear to be relatively low
compared to that of the truck.
As both the truck and motorcycle decelerated with respect to the primary vehicle, the motorcycle was
observed to drift to the left side of the lane. The plot in Figure F-22, illustrates that for a substantial
period oftirne (about 15 seconds), the motorcycle returns were no longer observable. Subsequently, the
motorcycle drifted back toward the center of the lane and was once again detected by the radar. The
motorcycle stayed fairly close to the center of the lane, with some small deviations, for the duration of
the collection.
The results of this test run contrast to those described for the previous data set in that the truck
returns remained much more prominent throughout the run. In fact, once the truck entered the primary
vehicle's lane, there were only several short periods during which the truck was fully occluded by the
motorcycle.
As was the case with the previous data set, the critical performance parameter from the radar
standpoint is whether or not the a consistent lock on the motorcycle can be held. Observing the raw
radar returns indicates that there are two periods of time during which the radar may have had trouble
maintaining a lock on the motorcycle. The largest gap occurs from 15:40:48 to 15:41:02 (pulses 1400 to
1650 in Figure F-22). The smaller gap occurs from 15:41:10 to 15:41:12 (pulses 1820 to 1900 in
Figure F-22).
Figure F-23 is the corresponding GPS trothing plot to the test run. The truck range is represented by
the line labeled "GPS Rng" and the reported FLAR range is represented by the line labeled "RDF Rng".
It is clearly evident in the plot that the FLAR (utilizing the TRW-proprietary processing algorithms) did
in fact lose lock on the motorcycle during the larger of the two gaps mentioned in the preceding
paragraph. During this period, the FLAR began tracking the truck rather than the motorcycle. The
transitions from tracking one vehicle as opposed to the other were not gradual transitions, but rather
abrupt, in that the report range showed no residual effects from the previously tracked vehicle's position.
F-22
70
l60l ,- ,- ~ ~. -,
50
40
Q)
Cl 30 -+-GPS Rng
C
Ill -m-RDFRng
a: 20
10
Time
Figure F-24 provides a better view of the relative return levels seen in the raw radar data during the
collection. Peak level returns were evaluated to estimate the radar cross section (RCS) exhibited by each
of the vehicles. These levels were found to be consistent with those listed in Table F-1,as expected.
Strong Vehicle Clutter m Range - TRC2 RI8
.
=··
05
04
fI0.3
~
E
::,
02
1ii
a:
0.1
0
0
150 500 Pulses (Time)

Distance (meters)
Conclusions
The empirical data discussed in this test report indicate that automotive radar designs must carefully
address the scenario of having a relatively small target located between the host vehicle and a relatively
large target. Motorcycles and narrow cars pose the worst problems because they allow much of the radar
energy to illuminate the large target located in front of them.
F-23
It was frequently observed in the empirical data that returns from both the motorcycle and truck
targets within the host vehicle’s lane were present. Furthermore, as the motorcycle drifted within its
lane, its returns could actually dissipate to the point where the FLAR began tracking the truck which was
at a greater range than the motorcycle. Obviously, this series of events could-have disastrous
consequences in an ACC application. The driver could find himself accelerating to achieve a set
headway behind the truck while colliding with the motorcycle.
These results emphasize the need for some form of scanning beam, in order to increase the radar’s
field of view and concentrate the highest gain portion of the beam across the path of the host vehicle.
One final issue of concern for this scenario deals with the use of automatic gain control (AGC) in the
radar receiver circuitry. AGC implementations may be used to increase the effective dynamic range of a
radar receiver and also protect it from saturation. However, there is a risk that a large vehicle, like the
truck, may cause the AGC circuitry to reduce the sensitivity of the receiver to low level returns like those
generated by the motorcycle.
The raw radar data in these tests was analyzed for AGC activity. The truck was found to induce a
decrease in the FLAR receiver sensitivity by reducing the gain in the AGC circuitry. However, further
analysis showed that the decrease in sensitivity did not, in and of itself, cause the loss of lock on the
motorcycle. Instead, the primary cause for loss of track on the motorcycle was its position within the
radar’s beam.
F.8 VEHICLE CLUTTER IN AZIMUTH-STRAIGHT ROADWAY
Purpose
The purpose of these tests were to evaluate the radar’s response to “clutter” vehicles positioned in
azimuth (i.e., in adjacent lanes) while tracking a target vehicle located in the host vehicle’s lane. This
tests the FLAR’s ability to discriminate between in-lane and out-of-lane vehicles.
F-24
Procedure
The FLAR' s center beam (3 dB width of

3 degrees in azimuth and elevation) was Plan View of Test Setting
activated during these tests. Enal p05itions
The two out-of-lane Secondary vehicles =:~;:--.m
(S2 and S3) had radar cross-sections equal to j§] il( TBD ► m
or greater than that of the in-lane Secondary
vehicle. The test began with the Primary
______l____
vehicle maintaining a constant distance from
the in-lane target vehicle; the out-of-lane
clutter vehicles were adjacent to the Primary _,In=terrnedi==·ate Pooitions
vehicle and traveling at the same speed. The
out-of-lane clutter vehicles then accelerated
m------~~:
l]J lll(TBD ► CT]
until they were adjacent to the in-lane
Secondary vehicle. They maintained this ~-----=:~;:
position for several seconds and then
decelerated until they were again adjacent to
the Primary vehicle. The test terminated
when the initial, relative vehicle positions
had been achieved.
l
131
-------------rao--------
Initial Pooitions
~111(► CT]
Results -----------------------
~
The results for this test scenario are Direction of Travel
provided in the next section.
F.9 MERGING TRAFFIC-STRAIGHT ROADWAY

Another version of this test was conducted using a single clutter vehicle in the adjacent lane to
simulate the situation frequently observed near a freeway entrance ramp. The vehicle dynamics are
similar detailed in Section F.8 "Vehicle Clutter in Azimuth-Straight Roadway" tests described above.
Results
The results of both sets of tests were found to be very benign. Over six different test runs of varying
target vehicle ranges up to 50 meters, the clutter vehicles never invoked a response in the raw radar data
or the FLAR processed outputs. The plots in Figure F-25 summarize the empirical data collected in the
tests.
The radar data accurately tracked the target vehicle's location throughout the test. The return levels
from the Honda Accord target vehicle consistent with measurements made during other tests (at 3 to
7 dBsm).
F-25
16:02:14-Begin File
S!Jong Verucie Clutter mRang,· iRC1 R19
Vehcle Clutter mi',muth • 1RC1 R19
1600 r······ .... .. ........ . . ... ········-·· ...
·241400
04
Accord 2 & Truck ex~ - .20
scene m0U1er lanes
141:Dl
Accord 2 & Truck next - 44 6IXl

10Accord 1 151'.JO
Accord 2 & Truck en1er - :34 400
scene m0U1er lanes
Accord 1 mfrontofVan - :24:Dl
0 ~ ~ ro ro ~ rn w OtStance(meter.;)
Pulses(lime)
lli~anc,,(m~ers)
(a) {b)
Figure F-25. Vehicle Clutter in Azimuth
Conclusions
For ranges up to 50 meters, vehicles in adjacent lanes do not appear to affect the raw returns of the
radar sensor, given the 3 degree beamwidth of the FLAR. These tests did not extend to ranges beyond
50 meters, and further testing should be conducted.
F.10 VEHICLE INDUCED FALSE ALARMS--CURVED ROADWAY
F.10.1 Purpose
The purpose of the following two tests ("Stationary Target Vehicle on Shoulder" and "Moving
Adjacent Lane Target Vehicle") is to evaluate the effect of guard rails and out-of-lane target vehicles
located on a curved roadway. In one case the vehicle was parked on the roadside shoulder and in the
other it was traveling in an adjacent lane in front of the Primary vehicle. Only the Primary and
Secondary vehicles were present on the roadway.
These tests were designed to measure the return levels, if any, observed in the raw radar return signal
from the "non-threatening" secondary vehicle and the guard rail.
F.10.1.1 Stationary Target Vehicle on Shoulder
Procedure
The Secondary vehicle was parked on the outside lane of a curved roadway which included a guard
rail. The Primary vehicle began in the straight portion of the roadway, accelerated to freeway speed,
passed the Secondary vehicle, and continued on until it exited the curved portion of the roadway
completing the test.
This test procedure was repeated a number of times using both a Honda Accord and a Semi-
Tractorffrailer as the Secondary vehicles. Runs were also made with the FLAR sensor's center beam
active. The center beam has a 3 degree azimuth and 3 degree elevation beamwidth.
F-26
Results
Plan View of Test Setting *
The ERIM Analysis PC software was used
to screen the data and identify the data sets
worthy of further analysis. Several data sets
were selected and the raw radar returns (prior to
any digitization in the FLAR) were processed Pos1bons
Jntcrmedaatc
using custom Matlab scripts. Several of the Positrons
!re:J
MA1LAB output plots will be used here to
illustrate the results. A complete set of plots
from all MATLAB processed tests are included -- --.;.-- - lmll:ll
j [El Pos1t1om.
at the end of this document. • Curve: aeccanwcd for dlmtc:Ltr:ll!vc p u ~
In general, radar returns form both the

roadside guard rail and target vehicles were observed in the MATLAB processed data. The signal levels
were well above the noise floor as will be illustrated below. Interestingly, the FLAR processed data
(i.e., the TRW processing algorithm within the FL.AR) never "locked-on" and tracked the returns from
the guard rail or parked target vehicles for any significant period of time.
F.10.1.2 Characteristic Return From Guard Rail
Figure F-26 illustrates the characteristic return from a guard rail located on a curved section of
road way. As the primary vehicle approaches the curve, the radar beam remains fixed on a single section
of guard rail which is located directly in front of the vehicle. Therefore, the reflection from the guard rail
"appears" to the radar as a stationary object located directly in front of the radar, and approaching the
radar at a rate equal to the vehicle's velocity. This portion of the guard rail characteristic is illustrated by
the returns occurring during pulses 2100 to 2200 in Figure F-26.
Out of Lane Vehicle Clutter- Straight-TRC2.R1 0

2800 ········•............................................................................................................
. . . . -
.. . ..
2600
2400
'S2200
E
~2000
.,
a,
'5
o.. 1800
1600
1400
1200.____........._ _.___........__---''---.........- - . _ __ _,
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Distance (meters)
Figure F-26. Out of Lane Vehicle Clutter-Straight
F-27
Once the vehicle itself enters the curve, the radar beam begins traveling along the horizontal extent
of the guard rail as the vehicle's heading constantly changes. Therefore, provided that the guard rail and
roadway have similar curvatures, the portion of the guard rail being illuminated by the radar remains at a
constant range as the vehicle proceeds through the curve. The guard rail returns of this type are observed
for pulses 2200 through 2500 in Figure F-26.
Guard Rail Decreasing in Range
Just prior to exiting the curve, the radar beam
illuminates portions of the guard rail that do not
have a similar curvature to that of the roadway.
These portions of guard rail are actually straight.
Therefore, as the vehicle exits the curve, the
distance to the guard rail rapidly increases until the
radar beam is no longer illuminating the guard rail,
but instead is directed down the lane occupied by
the host vehicle. This is illustrated during pulses • Curve :sc:ccatu~tcd for .illui::tr:1tr:i.1.tvc purpo$C!.
2500 and up in Figure F-26.

This dynamic sequence of events (see
Figure F-27) creates the characteristic "C-shaped"
return from the guard rail. Analysis of the guard Guard Rail Increasing in Range
rail experiments conducted under this program
have resulted in RCS values for guard rails on the
order of Oto 5 dBsm. Of course these values are
heavily dependent upon specific configuration of
the guard rail, but it is evident that these RCS
levels can compete with those from vehicles,
pedestrians, and other roadway objects (see
Section 3 of the fmal report for a description of
RCS measurements on common roadway objects). Figure F-27. Sequence of Guard Rail Returns
The final observation from the guard rail return
is that due to the radar footprint which illuminates the curved portion of the rail, the returns indicate that
the target has significant range extent. This attribute may be the cause for the FLAR's inability to "lock-
on" and track the target as mentioned above.
F.10.1.3 Returns from Stationary Honda Accord
Figure F-28 shows are plots taken from experiments run with the Honda Accord used as the
stationary target vehicle. The return from the Accord is annotated in Figure F-28(a). The return from the
vehicle is brief due to the radar illumination beam sweeping horizontally through the scene as the host
vehicle proceeds through the tum (see Figure F-27 for illustration of beam dynamics). Figure F-28(b)
illustrates the relative return level from the Accord as compared to the guard rail and noise floor.
F-28
Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Cuived Road• TRC1 R22 18:09:52 • Begin File
01
42
008
> Aceordm1rcnt- 38
¾o[lj olVan
~ :32"
Aa:ord enters scene- .30 !
~004
~002
121Xl
150 20J Pulses (lime)

Distance (meters)
(a) (b)
Figure F-28. Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved Road
Quantitative analysis of the returns from the Accord result in an RCS measurement of 2 to 3 dBsm.
The value for the Accord correlates well to the RCS measurements made on similar vehicles in this
program. This return level is slightly above that of the guard rail itself. During this test, the FLAR itself,
utilizing the TRW processing algorithms, sporadically "locked-on" and tracked the returns from the
guard rail for very brief periods of time (less than 500 msec). None of these brief "lock-on" periods
corresponded to the returns from the Accord.
F.10.1.4 Returns from Stationary Tractor/Trailer
Figure F-29 shows plots taken from experiments run with the semi-tractor/trailer used as the
stationary target vehicle. The return from the tractor/trailer is annotated in Figure F-29(a). The return
from the vehicle is still fairly brief, but significantly longer than that from the Accord--approximately
1.25 second as opposed to 500 msec. The longer duration is due to the greater length of the truck
compared to the Accord. This difference in length causes the horizontally sweeping radar beam to
illuminate the truck for a longer period of time than it illuminated the Accord tum (see Figure F-27 for
illustration of beam dynamics). Figure F-29(b) illustrates the relative return level from the
Tractor/Trailer as compared to the guard rail and noise floor.
13·57:16 • Begin File Velucle-ol FalsePJanns- CmvedRcad• TRC1 R24
04
46Sll
s:-03
I.
TltJCke~tsscene- :38"g
t
Jo2 i)"
:36:'GJ 5
Truck lllf,ontol- ::l5 :
Van on curve l ~01
Trud< enters scene- :30 :m
.26 m
Puises(Tme)
DISlanc, (mete~)
(a) (b)
Figure F-29. Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved Road
F-29
Quantitative analysis of the returns from the tractor/trailer returns result in an RCS measurement of
over 12 dBsm. The value for the tractor/trailer correlates well to the RCS measurements made on similar
vehicles in this program. The truck’s high RCS causes its return levels to rise substantially above those
from the guard rail. During this particular test, the FLAR itself, utilizing the TRW processing
algorithms, never “locked-on” and tracked the returns from the guard rail or the large brief return from
the truck.
Conclusions for Stationary Target Vehicle on Shoulder

The test results discussed above illustrate how the dynamic movement of the radar through a typical
roadway curve produces a characteristic return pattern (the ‘C-shape’) from a guard rail located on that
curve.
Table F-2 provides quantitative information regarding the return levels observed in these
measurements. Clearly, these levels of returns could certainly induce false alarms under specific
scenarios.
Table F-2. Return Levels of Stationary Clutter
Description Filename RCSs (dBsm)
Guard Rail TRC2:R10 0.9986449

Accord on Shoulder TRCI:R22 25822699
Truck on Shoulder TRCI:R24 12.37137
F.10.1.5 Moving Adjacent Lane Target Vehicle
Procedure
The Primary and Secondary vehicles were

traveling at freeway speeds in adjacent lanes as Plan View of Test Setting *
they proceeded through the curve. A number of
runs were made during which the range between
the vehicles was held relatively constant. This
range was varied from 10 to 70 meters on a per
experiment basis. Runs were also made in which
the range varied during the run. The Primary
vehicle maintained a constant speed and the
Secondary vehicle varied its speed to achieve the
desired range profiles. -
Multiple runs of this test were made using a
Honda Accord and semi-tractor/trailer as the Secondary vehicle. Also, some runs were made with the
FLAR center beam active, and some with the left beam active. Refer to the discussion on the FLAR
antenna beam analysis for the description of these beam patterns.
Results
Data from these tests was screened using the ERIM Analysis PC software to identify the data sets
worthy of further analysis. Several data sets were selected and the raw radar returns (prior to any
digitization in the FLAR) were processed using custom Matlab scripts. Several of the MATLAB output
F-30
plots will be used here to illustrate the results. A complete set of plots from all MATLAR processed
tests are included at the end of this document.
The plots provided in Figure F-30 are indicative of the results obtained with a moving target vehicle
in an adjacent lane on a curved road. In this particular case, the secondary vehicle, a semi-tractor with
trailer, provided a strong and consistent return throughout the majority of the curve maneuver,
For the given dynamics of this test, the raw radar return which was collected from the FXAR’s center
beam could be interpreted as though the host vehicle was directly behind the primary vehicle at a fairly
consistent 40 to 50 meter range. For an ACC system, this would mean that the primary vehicle should
track and maintain a specified headway to the secondary vehicle. However, this would of course be an
operational error since the secondary vehicle is actually located in the adjacent lane.
Vehicle induced False Alarms- Curved Road -TRC1 R29n Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Curved Road - TRC1 R29n
o,
Truck in front enleft -- .11 0

0 40 60
Figure F-30. Adjacent Lane Vehicle on Curve
Conclusions for Adjacent Lane Target Vehicle on Curve

The results of the adjacent lane vehicle tests have shown that without knowledge of the host vehicle
dynamics or of the lane geometry in front of the host vehicle, it is very probable that a FLAR unit would
incorrectly lock on to an adjacent lane vehicle. If additional information about the host vehicle’s
environment and activities were available, these could be utilized by the processing electronics to
significantly decrease these types of false alarms.
For instance, an angular rate sensor on-board the host vehicle would provide information related to
the current trajectory of the vehicle. If the radar system is aware that the vehicle is currently
maneuvering through a curve, and the approximate curvature of the curve could be derived, then the
radar data processing algorithm and threat assessment algorithm could use this information to filter out
returns from adjacent lane vehicles based on the range and azimuthal location of the returns. This of
course assumes that the radar system possesses the necessary azimuthal resolution.
F.1 1 TRACKING THROUGH A CURVE
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to determine the FLAR’s ability to maintain track on a target vehicle
through a standard freeway curve on a dry, flat section of roadway. The test was performed under good
driving conditions. Roadway was selected that had guard rails in the scene.
F-31
Issues that were considered in these tests included the loss of returns from the target vehicle, and the
returns induced by the guard rail around the curve.
Procedure
The test commenced when the Primary
vehicle was tracking the target vehicle (a Honda
Accord) in a straight section of roadway prior to
entering a curve. Both vehicles were traveling at
approximately the same speed, attempting to
maintain those speeds and the initial separation
/'):::~~_::~~:-~-~:-~~
of 10,40, and 70 meters throughout the test
maneuver. The test terminated when both
vehicles were again on a straight section of
//r:;
( , { Guard
Finish
roadway. !@} rail

As implied above, several tests were
conducted, with the distance between the host
: !Tim
and target vehicle being 10,40, and greater than Ston ••••••••. • [!I •..........
70 meters in individuaI runs. * Curve accentuated for illustratrative purposes
Results
The raw radar data plots for the mns conducted with target vehicles at 10,40, and 70 meters are
provided in Figures F-3 1 and F-32. Figure F-3 1 is annotated to identify the source for each of the radar
returns. Figure F-32 provides information on the relative return levels which can be used for more
numerical analysis.
The remainder of this section will contrast the results from the three different test runs.
F-32
Ability to Maintain Track on Target Vehicle
The data plots shown in Figure F-3 1 clearly indicate that the return levels from the target vehicle
were not impacted during the turn maneuver when the target vehicle was at a nominal 10 meter range
[see Figure F-31(a)]. However, the reuim levels did exhibit significant impact when the target vehicle
was at the nominal 40 and 70 meter ranges [see Figures F-31(b) and (c)]. At a 40 meter range, the
target’s vehicle’s return levels were observed throughout the turn maneuver at a much lower level than
on a straight roadway. At 70 meters, the target vehicle was not observed at all throughout the turn
maneuver. For a more quantitative assessment of the impact on the return levels, see the analysis of the
relative return levels provided below.
The radius of the curve used on these tests was approximately 238 meters which is a relatively tight
turning radius at normal highway speeds. Table F-3 shows the angular departure from the radar antenna
boresight at which the target vehicle is located, given the target vehicle range and a 780 feet radius curve.
These values correlate very well with the observations. At a 10 meter range, the target vehicle is located
1.2 degrees off of the antenna boresight. This is within the 3 degree (1.5 degrees on either side of the
boresight) PLAR center beam which was active on these tests.
Table F-3. Angular Departure for 238 Meter Radius Curve
Angular Departure
Range to Target From Boresight
10 meters 1.2 degees

40 meters 4.8 degrees
70 meters 8.5 degees
On the other hand, at 40 meters the target vehicle is 4.8 degrees off the boresight. As explained in
‘Section F. 1: Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Straight Roadway,” the real antenna beam extends
beyond the 3 degree specification with much lower gain. Therefore, it makes sense that the target
vehicle is still visible at 40 meters, but at much lower levels.
At 70 meters, the vehicle is located 8.5 degrees off of the antenna boresight. At this level of
departure, the antenna beam gain is extremely low and the target vehicle is effectively out of the radar’s
field of view. As Figure F-31(c) ilhtstrates, radar returns from the target vehicle given this scenario were
not evident.
This data leads to the conclusion: The ability of an automotive radar to maintain lock on a target
vehicle is dependent upon the range to the target vehicle and the radius of the curve. In evaluating the
raw radar returns under this test scenario, one could conclude that a radar should be able to track the
vehicle at 10 meters, may be able to track the vehicle at 40 meters, and probably could not track the
vehicle at 70 meters.
The GPS truthing plots provided in Figure F-33 correspond to the data plots from the three tests runs.
The range to the target vehicle is represented by the curve labeled “GPS Rng” and the reported range
from the FLAR (using the TRW-proprietary algorithms) is represented by the curve labeled “RDF Rng”.
F-34
,;
cf~ ► Range Range

en Range --1 --1 ...I. --1 ...J.
~ 'd
~ I\) .S:,.0,0001\l
...... 415212 I
0
...
0
t
I\:)
0
II
('.,)
0
r
.is.
0
r
01
0
r
(J)
0
I 415016r
01\l.S:,.O>CX>Ol\l.S:,.O,CX,
en 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
I'll
0
0
ct
415396 I a t t t t I 415216
VJ 415022
~ p.. 415219
"CS g. 415403
g 0 415223 415028.
t~ 415411 415226
415034
.,,
.;.i . i
g' 415230
~
fl► 0...~ <0'
C:
415418
4152331 ' ' ' 415040 i '. -··1 '.
-I
' '
-
I
- I
- -
' '
I
- I
' '
-
I
~s w
f
415237 . , . • . , . . . . •1 • 1• •1 • I •1 • ,•
71
415426
415240' ! · · · · . : · · l ·:. :· ; ·: -: : ·: ·
~ ::t 415046 · · · · · · ·
~ ~ ~ ::t 415433 -1 415244 _ ::!
§ 0 G)
"'CJ
i I: ,· ■ j' 415247 ~ 415052 i -: .:- ;
-, - 1· T
~::t en 415441
0~ 415251 I
_1. ,_ 1
s[ ~ 415058
J;
VI
q OC!
~
~
;::,-
g.
o
~ ocifi!
0
-,
:D
(,,)
0
415448
415456 : : : IT ;:!
415265
~I
415064
4150701 :•:
0~;g.
~
,:-,
:D
.....
c..)
415463 4152681 · : . ~
415272 ' '
.•
' 415076
'
•I•
-: ·'
'
I
< (';'
g.
o· s-
0
....
~
ll)
:::,
0.
415471
415275
415279
i----
~ .
I . : . : . : •
415082 ~ ·' . '·
o8 :D
!!l.
--J oci
= (,,)
I\)
-,
0::,-' ....
s
(I)
ct
g'
0
++
:n
0
G)
-0 ++
:0 G) ++
;JJ G>
i:: -n en 0 "O 0 "O
t;l ~ "Tl (/) "Tl (/)
0 (I) '?1 '?1
(Q (Cl
:0
:J
;JJ
:J :0 :.0
:J :::i
~ ~ (0 (Cl (0 (0
~
~- ......
(I)
(I) 0
~
i<i%i ....
0... !!J
g
curve. Between those two extremes is the test with the target vehicle at 40 meters. The middle plot in
Figure F-33 clearly shows that when the range to the target dropped below 40 meters, the F’LAR was able
to acquire and track the vehicle. However, as the target range exceeded 40 meters, the FLAR was very
unreliable in providing an accurate measurement to the target vehicle. -
The other interesting information contained in the plots of Figure F-33, is that the radar
intermittently identifies the guard rail as a target to be tracked (indicated by the non-zero “RDF Rng”
readings which do not correspond to “GPS Rng” values). It was originally expected that the radar would
track the guard rail throughout the turn maneuver since the returns were consistently present. However,
it is suspected that the TRW algorithms resident within the FLAR may have had difficulty identifying the
centroid of the guard rail returns since they were spread over a 15 meter range.
Analysis of Relative Return Levels

The plots provided in Figure F-32 indicate the sizes of the relative return levels between the Honda
Accord on the straight path, the Honda Accord around the curve, and the guard rail. Table F-4
summarizes the numerical analysis aimed at generating quantitative results on typical RCS values which
can be expected in a scenario similar to the one tested here. Note again that this particular scenario used
a curve with an approximately 238 meter radius.
Table F-4. RCS Numerical Analysis
Target Empirically Estimated RCS
Accord on Straight Road 0 to 5 dBsm

Accord at 10 m Range on Curve 0 to 5 dBsm
Accord at 40 m Range on Curve -3 dBsm and below
Accord at 70 m Range on Curve No Returns Observed
Guard Rail on Curve Typically 0 dBsm, 4 dF3sm peaks
The Accord on the straight roadway exhibited RCS levels consistent with those observed during
other tests and measured during the RCS Characteristics task of this program. There was very little
difference in the RCS of the Accord on a straight and at a 10 meter range on the curve. At the 40 meter
range, the RCS of the Accord dropped significantly.
Characteristic Return from Guard Rail

The return from the guard rail was consistent throughout the curve maneuver, in that it was always
present. The RCS averaged around 0 dBsm and occasionally peaked up near 4 dBsm. Comparison of
these numbers shows that in terms of the magnitude, the guard rail can appear similar to a car.
The shape of the return from the guard rail (see Figure F-3 1) has significant range or depth to it. The
radar returns from the guard rail are spread over approximateIy 10 to 15 meters in range. Figure F-34
shows how the incident radar energy will illuminate targets on curved roadways, such as guard rails.
F-36
Exhibited by Rail
Figure F-34. illumination of Targets on Curved Roadways
The other interesting characteristic of the guardrail return is its “C-shaped” profile over time. The
reason for this profile is discussed in detail in Section 6.10, “Vehicle Induced False Alarms-Curved
Roadway.
Conclusions
The change in return levels from preceding vehicles on a straight roadway to those on a curved
roadway is dependent upon the radius of the curve and the range to the vehicle. These tests showed that
for a curve with an approximate 238 meter radius, vehicle ranges above 40 meters lead to a loss of track
on the target (note that this is for an antenna beam with a 3 degree 3 dB width). The differences in return
levels can be attributed to a combination of the target vehicle being located off of the antenna beam
boresight, and the aspect angle being less than or greater than 180 degrees.
Guard rails located at the outer extent of the curved roadway were observed to exhibit RCS levels
comparable to that of the vehicle tested. The vehicle tested was a Honda Accord with a 0 to 5 dBsm
RCS characteristic for 180 degree aspect angle. Although returns from the guard rail were consistently
observed in the radar raw data, the FLAR did not consistently track the guard rail as a target.
The results of these tests indicate the value that could be provided by lmowledge of the vehicle
dynamics for a collision avoidance or ACC system. Knowing when a vehicle is in a curve, whether from
yaw rate sensing or steering wheel angle, would be an important input to a system’s threat assessment
algorithm. The information could be useful in identifying certain returns as those from roadside objects,
such as guard rails. The information could also be used to adjust the radar’s field of view in the direction
of the curve to aid in maintaining track on the preceding vehicle.
F.12 VEHICLE CLUTTER IN AZIMUTH-CURVED ROADWAY
Purpose
The purpose of this test was to determine the FLAR’s ability to maintain track on a target vehicle
through a standard freeway curve with other vehicles present in adjacent lanes. The test was performed
under good driving conditions.
F-37
Issues considered in these tests included the loss of returns from the target vehicle, the FLAR’s
ability to discriminate between in-lane and out-of-lane target vehicles, and the returns induced by the
vehicles in the adjacent lanes.
-
Procedure
For these tests, four different vehicles were used on a circular track with an approximate 500 foot
radius. The primary vehicle (P) and target vehicle (Sl) were driven in the center lane of the circle. The
two other vehicles were clutter vehicles (S2 and S3) driven in the inner and outer lanes of the circle. The
two out-of-lane clutter vehicles were selected to have radar cross-sections similar that of the in-lane
target vehicle. Actually, all three secondary vehicles were Honda Accords.
The test began with the
Primary vehicle maintaining a
constant distance from the m-lane ,,. .,.. ----
------
...........
..... .....
....
target vehicle; the out-of-lane ,,. ,. ., ..... .... '
/ ,. '
clutter vehicles were adjacent to the / /
' '
~
\~,\ '8
/ /
Primary vehicle and traveling at the
I
I
I
/
' ',
same speed. The out-of-lane clutter I I
I I
vehicles accelerated until they were I I
adjacent to the in-lane Secondary I I
I \
vehicle. They maintained this
position for several seconds and
I
I
I
I
I
I
B' I II
then decelerated until they were

again adjacent to the Primary
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
I
0' I
I
I
I
I
I
\
vehicle. \ / I
' ' ' ' ' .... / I

/ /
These types of maneuvers were
,,,. ,. .,,. /
/ /
' .........
repeated several times during the
course of a test run. Sometimes the
' '..._
........ _ ----- ,,,. ,.
,,,.
clutter vehicles maneuvered

together, and some times
individually. The distance between Figure F-35. Vehicle Clutter on Curved Roadway Scenario
the primary and target vehicles was
varied during each test runs. Also, the FLAR’s active beam (left, center, or right) was varied on separate
runs.
F-38
Results
To illustrate and discuss the results of this series Vehicle Clutter 1n Azmuth • Curved Roadway • iRC2. R28C
of tests, data from one of the test runs in which the 6000
FLAR' s center beam was active will be used.
Observations from test runs in which the left and right
beam were active will also be discussed.
5400
The series of plots shown in Figure F-36 are all i
-;;-s.;ro}
from the same data set. Each plot consists of a E
E.
different time interval of the test, which lasted for :SIDJ i
almost 5 minutes. The time sequence begins with the ~mi
bottom plot in Figure F-36, proceeds up to the middle 4600
plot and then is completed with the top plot.
4400
The returns which are visible in the data plots are
4200
annotated to indicate the vehicle which induced them.
400J---~-------'--...,___....____.
Accord 1 is the actual target vehicle located in the o ~ ~ ro ro ~ ~ ~
Distance (meters)
same lane as the host vehicle. Accord 2 was driving
on the inside lane and Accord 3 was driving on the Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth • Curved Roadway• iRC2 R288
outside lane. The radius of curvature was

approximately 500 feet in the middle lane.
To analyze these tests, extensive use was made of
the BRIM Analysis Software which includes a video
playback of the test which is synchronized to the radar
data. Without the video playback, it is difficult to
convey the exact vehicle maneuvers being conducted
throughout the test. In an effort to convey the vehicle ml
positions during the test to the reader, the line labeled
"GPS Rng'' in Figure F-37 indicates the range from
the radar to the target vehicle throughout the test. The
pulse number on the x-axis of Figure F-37
corresponds to the pulse number on the y-axis of the ~ ~ ro ro ~ rn ~
OIStance (meters)
radar return plots in Figure F-36. Also, Table F-5 Vehicle Clutter mAzmuth • Curved Roadway• lRC2:R28A
provides a sequence of events for the target and two
clutter vehicles referenced to radar pulse number.
~ ~ ro ro ~ rn ~
Distance {maers)
Figure F-36. Radar Data Curved -Roadway
F-39
50
,,,,,,,,,,,1111,,,, .. ,,.,,,,, .. ,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,.,, •.....
.
45
40
35
ai 30
:.-: '~: :-------------------------------------.:11
I I I I
:: :~: ~: :~: : :~: : :~: : :~: : : :~: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :: : :~: : :: : :i
I I I OO O OO O I I I I I I I I I I I I I O I I O< • I O I J I J I I f I I I I I t O t O O Io I I I I J t I t t I I t I I IO o Oto O O I I I~ I I t I I I I I I I I t Io I I o I 1;
Cl -+-GPSRng
~ 25
-RDFRng
a: 20
15
10
5
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 'Sf' co (0 <d" co (0 'Sf' co
,.._ (0 0 co co ,.._
0
0) .,... C')
C\I
(0 co
0
C') It)
C\I
co 0
0
C') It)
C\I
0 C\I It) ;!!: 0) C\I
C\I 'Sf'
c=:i t\l C\I C\I C') C') t') (') 'st 'st 'st 'st 'st It) I{) It)
Time (Pulse)
Table F-5. Curved Roadway Test Analysis Summary

Pulse# Vehicle Activity Radar Response
900-2600 Accord 1 is only vehicle in scene Radar ability to track Accord I position
dependent upon range
2500-2700 Accords 2/3 enter scene and accelerate to Accords 2/3 appeared to have no effect on
positions adjacent to Accord I raw radar data and ability of FLAR to track
Accord 1
2700-3000 Accords 2/3 maintain positions adjacent to same as above
Accord I
3000-3100 Accords 2/3 split-off and drop out of scene same as above
3000-4200 Accord 1 is only vehicle in scene Radar ability to track Accord 1 position
dependent upon range
4200-4400 Accord 3 enters scene and accelerates to Accord 3 position has effect on raw radar
position in outside lane and 1 car length returns. As Accord I and Accord 3
behind Accord 1 maneuver, returns from both vehicles are
observed.
4400-end Accord 3 maintains position in outside lane, same as above
I car length behind Accord 1
Correlation between the information in Figure F-36, Figure F-37, and Table F-5 is necessary to
establish the cause and effect of vehicle maneuvers on the radar sensor. The third column in Table F-5
summarizes the radar response to the various events conducted during the test.
As observed in other tests conducted on curved roadways, the radar returns from preceding vehicles
are dependent upon the radius of curvature in the roadway and the target vehicle's range from the radar.
These two variables dictate whether or not the target vehicle position is located within the FLAR's field
of view. Considering pulses 900 to 2600, where the only vehicle in the scene was Accord I, Figure F-36
indicates that the vehicle both entered and withdrew from the FLAR's FOV. This information can be
correlated with the GPS trothing information included in Figure F-37. The line labeled "GPS Rng" is the
F-40
actual range to Accord 1, and the line labeled "RDF Rng" is the FLAR's reported range to target vehicle
output. It is clear that the FLAR' s ability to track the target vehicle coincided with time intervals when
the raw radar data indicates the vehicle was within the FOV.
The time period during which the returns from the target vehicle were nor evident in the raw radar
data correspond to intervals in which the target vehicle range exceeded more than 15 to 20 meters.
Table F-6 shows at what angle from the antenna boresight a vehicle would be located on a 500 foot
radius curve given a particular range to that vehicle. These numbers are in agreement with the
configuration of the FLAR and the empirical observations made during this test.
Table F-6. Vehicle Location Versus Range to Vehicle
Range to Target Vehicle Location Off
Vehicle Antenna Boresight

A plot of the FLAR' s center beam pattern

is provided in Figure F-38. A line has been Center Beam
I
drawn to indicate where in the beam pattern a 10 dBJDivi
--- •- 4 degrees off of
target would fall if it was located four degrees - boresight
off the antenna boresight.
,~., rr- - i '1L
It is obvious that the antenna gain in this ;.:;l~ ~... ~•S!'C
region is extremely low. This explains why

the returns from Accord I are not visible in
the raw radar data when its range exceeds 15
to 20 meters on a 500 foot radius curve.
This also helps to explain why Accords 2
and 3 did not induce any returns in the radar
during pulses 2500 to 3000. The data in
Figure F-37 shows that the range to Accord I 18°/Div.
during that period was under 20 meters.
Therefore, Accord 1's position prevented the Figure F-38. Center Beam Patterns
radar beam from being reflected off any other
objects, as pictured in Figure F-39. Here the radar beam is incident on Accord 1, but not on any other
objects in the scene. This is verified by the raw radar plots in Figure F-36.
F-41
The observations and results made during
pulses 3000 to 4200 are similar to those made
I
' I I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
\
, I
during pulses 900 to 2600 described above.

\
I
I
I
\
I
I
\
I
\
' ,
I
I
\
~ _,rJ.,, / I
From pulse 4200 to the end of the test run

\
I
'
.,, ...... /
''
' ,
//
(pulse 5850), things start to get interesting.

,
.... '
',
Here, the relative positioning of Accords 1 and

.----- .._._, ...
- --[ti---
------ -... ...
3 begins to have an effect on the raw radar

----~
r:;-::;-~--
returns and the ability of the FLAR to

. . ...~
. _ .._ '1f1
~----
accurately track the target vehicle within its

own lane.
The same dependency of the FLAR’s
,,,-' ,,,,.--
,,... .,,...
,.._
ability to detect targets on radius of curvature

''
'
and range to target still holds true. Figure F-38

'
/
'
'
/
shows that targets are still detected by the

\
'
I
;
\
I
'
;
\
I
\
I
FLAR only when their range drops below

I \
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
\
f
\
I
20 meters or so. The truthing information for

I
I
I
I
I
I
pulses 4300 and up from Figure F-38 is

reproduced in Figure F-40 for greater clarity.
Figure F-39. Short Range Illumination
~
~jg
+ GPS Rng
... Range
...
()1
+ RDF Rna
0
()1
0
5340 ·
4300
4540
4620
5020
f 5100
5180
5260
5420
5500
5580
5660
5740
5820
5900
4380
4460
4700
4780
4860
4940
Ill
The data in Figure F-40 shows that the FLAR (and the TRW-proprietary processing algorithm)
detected an object inside the actual range of Accord 1. Comparison of this data in Figure F-40 with the
raw radar data plots provided in Figure F-36 verifies that the FLAR is indeed tracking Accord 3.
Figure F-41 shows a diagram of the situation.
F-42
Referring back to the top plot in Figure F-36,
returns from both vehicles can be frequently ,....------
observed. Due to the orientation of the vehicles, the .,,...-------· ....
/
returns from Accord 3 appear at a nearer range. /

/
''
/ /
Therefore, the FLAR treats this return as the target I
/
/
/
to be tracked. The FLAR has no knowledge of I

I
/
I
which lane Accord 3 is actually in. I
I
I
I
I
Also referring to the raw radar plots in /
Figure F-36, it appears that returns are coming from

different scattering centers located on Accord 3,
perhaps the rear and front wheel wells.
\ \
/
The return levels observed from the Honda \
\
/
\
' /
Accords during this test were typical of other tests ' ' ' ' .... /
/
/
with these vehicles. In general, the Accords ' .... .... .... -------
exhibited a -2 to +5 dBsm radar cross section. This _____ .,,...
is slightly lower than tests conducted with the
Accords on a straight roadway. The explanation for
Figure F-41. Medium Range Illumination
the difference lies in the orientation between the
radar and the targets. On curved roadway less return
is expected, since the relatively flat sides of the vehicle tend to reflect energy away from the radar.
The other collections made using this test scenario, but with the left or right beams activated,
produced similar results in terms of the field-of-view limitations. It was found that collections with the
left beam active allowed the FLARto track the target vehicle out to a range of 40 meters versus the
20 meter limitation with the center beam. Also, neither Accord 2 or 3 was detected during the “left
beam” tests.
On the other hand, “right beam” tests reduced the FLAR’s ability to track the in-lane target vehicle
down to around 10 meters. However Accord 3, located in the outside lane, could be tracked out to
35 meters or so. These “side beam” tests show how adjusting the FLAR’s field of view will affect its
performance, especially in curved roadway scenarios.
Conclusions
The empirical data in these tests showed that the ability of the FLAR to accurately track preceding
vehicles in a curve depends on the curvature of the roadway and the range to the target vehicles. The
diagrams provided the in the “Results” section of this document illustrate this dependency.
The FLAR center beam with its 3 degree 3dB azimuth width limited the detection range to the in-
lane target vehicle to around 20 meters in a 500 foot radius curve. Given that 20 meters is not a very
great distance, this limitation needs to be addressed by either steering the beam during a curve maneuver
or increasing the radar’s field of view by scanning the antenna across the scene. The tests conducted
with the side beams indicates the gains that can be made in terms of increasing the detection ranges.
The results of these tests, combined with those from curved road tests with a guard rail present,
indicate that it will be extremely difficult for an automotive radar to accurately assess the environmental
dangers during a curve maneuver without other inputs into the system. Inputs such as yaw rate, steering
wheel angIe, and any information regarding the azimuth positioning of objects in the scene would greatly
enhance the robustness of the threat assessment algorithm. Yaw rate and steering wheel angle
information could be easily gathered from sensors installed on the car. As for azimuthal positioning of
objects, two options exist. The first is to create an even narrower antenna beam and scan it across the
F-43
scene. The other is to perform a data fusion function from a separate sensor such as an IR or optical
camera to identify object positioning within the scene.
Obviously, adding another sensor beyond the radar for collision avoidance or ACC applications
would make the system cost prohibitive. However, as night driving enhancement systems and lane
sensing systems evolve, the possibility of sharing information among sensors becomes viable.
F-44
TEST TRACK DATA PLOTS
The following pages are selected raw data plots generated from the Test Track collections. The plots
are presented by the test scenario being addressed as described in the test plan provided in Appendix E.
Each plot is labeled with the appropriate test identification and annotation on the plots is provided where
appropriate. The reader is referred to the test plan and test results descriptions in Appendices E and F,
respectively.
These plots are provided to assist developers in quantitatively assessing the radar response to the
scenarios tested. Of course these results are specific to the TRW FLAR sensor configuration
(e.g., antenna gain and beam shape). The reader is referred to Section 4 of the final report which
discusses the FLAR sensor characteristics in order to extrapolate the results to other configurations.
~ \
'\I
~;;. c,
\.,~
C
~
£
\
g \ 0:,
'C>
'..,,
y
~
0
;;.
'5
.:,
\ \ g
I"'
.t
-;;.
> /~
·--.-..
c.. "'
,::,
"'"'
-=:--
::r, f"'
.,,,.,
$';
--
C,
,:,.
t
r,:
< 3
~
·--
~
~
d-,
0
0
C,
0
0
..,,
0
Q
"'
0
c::>
~-'\:.u:s;JO/\ wmac
00
;;....
...
-<-...
;::
----
:;,)
::r,
--
r~
~
~
-- C
11 I
-.-:::...
=
<:J
i~
I
I
,,,-,
-
0
-
;;....
-.6
~
C:
--=-...
~
t,J
=
... -=:..0 :;:
=
= ...=
- <= ·--=-
t,J
0
<:J t,J
0
-u...- :c-==-=
;.
Q, Q,
~
;.
~ 0
-
'\ "'
\
\,;,
,, g
\., 0
\
\ \\
\g 'o
\~
\"'
v V
\
C:
,- \
'-"
_,
\ \
.-;
0
C
\
\..~
0
/o
, --
! !
'o
0
/
I
t'@.
/
oe
0
0
------------le
= .,,
,..,,
0 ~ ~ ~ "' 0
0
0 0 0
(NJ.:Js:101, um1a1:,
-...-...
; .,
-<
- ~
!;.I;
q_~__l
e:
;..
"'C
~
---...
~
"'C
-
--.:3
--
·---... --...
:.. e:
-
~
:.. Q,
~
:e
-~ -... 1:-- ...
:~e
~
e:
= - ·--
:; C ;;, ~ c- "'
~ c ~
~
~ 0 0 C 0 C 0
-- ·-=...
s.. ~ "'C
Q., I ~
~
-
;..
r
~
\
Q.,
rr..,
-
....e:
6.1 Vehicle Induced False Alarm - Vehicle Al Roadside
flNl fle~po••so to Hoa<Js•Je Vcl\1(le (,iuik1 11K2 f!OI

OOl
o,,ql
008,
r, O(,iir
Ijli 006,
'>
o o~ d1:
I
t R~ lmll ffl'lll \d,t. t.•
"' p.Hh·d f~Ji fH.,hJ .. t~k
tkhm11,, f11vn
~ 004-
0 OJ t11,),tu~h 1 \dt:lk &
fjj
O' 0 02 ·
i "-_ -. -~ ,.,~--··- 4 00
0 01 '""---..,. .....
50 ,.. -·_,.,.•~,·1,,0
_,~.,
,,./ _,....-·"·,oo
---:,..<.-
~o 40 60 so •~o 140 150 250 Pulses (f1me)
Olshn,e (melers)
I llfl fl&S!)OllSO I? HoaJ~1deVetu;IQ Clutter 1m 2 HO! (l~orned)
Truck 00?5
k~•tiun (min \\ lu,h' 1
....--pl.lll'll (") l(\hJ,,,J:

007,
S"
E
~0015.
~
f: 001.
&i
a·
00()5,
o,.,-
0 "'
Van
Center Heam Pulses (lime)
Semi-Tractor/'l'railcr 01slanc e (rnelers)
parked in adjacent hme

·-
,o
\~
'0
f
X0
I -'
·-"'-
I
I
;.r,
-
"'O
:::=-
_,.
~0200
0 0 0 0 0
(..\;.:;)cu~;, ...:nine
--
=
:..
--<
....
-::.,
ti;
_.,.
;...
"'O
~ ""
-= =
--~
·---
; .I
:;.)
;;,.
-~
,-
~
-~ ~
-
-
-
~
-
:., ::
-
:..
~~
..,
·-=... -(:,I
;. C.I
-- --=·--·--=-
i "' ;; 0
.:, > =
"-
C
C,
C _,
~
C
C
--- ·--·--.....,.
C.I
.....
~ :..
E---I "'O
~
·- - =
et
==
~
00 Q.
6.1 Vehicle Induced False Alnrm Vehicle At Roadside
M
Fl.AR H~spcnse !o Hoadwlo Vel<Jtl& Ch1t'e•-lfl('1 fl01

1)(1~ .. " " ~-=r """ ~"" 1'"" - ·-
aor;
OU
OM-
OM
r
fO~.
lo~.
[
ion.
~
om.
,r.,.M' ..... --·· ... ,,... 400
..-_,...<~ .v 350
, ...... ~~ 300
,. ·-,<_..- ~ 150
600 SM 10M woo
15ll 200
Pulses (flm~)
Distance (meters)
f lAl? Hcspon~o IO llOMS1de Vch (le Clutter-Tf!C2 H03 (loomed)
IA@rol
0 02
,.., 0 015
tp 300
~ 001,
!: 340
,1
&! 0005--
Van 0-
20
-,- ---. ·7-- .. · ,· ... -- r -- ·· -, · · · ··-·
Center Heam 40 60 80 100 I )0 140 Pulses (f!ln
Honda Accord fllc.l~nrfl ,m~t~r-::-\
1>arked in adjacent lane

.,._
0
I, "'
\ 0
\ ~
\
-=-
•
-
~
~
--
c:,,)
r,,;
~
"'C
-
:,.)
~ 11 I
--
"'C
·--...
~
-~
Q,,)
;,.
--
Q,,)
=
--
-~----
~
:.J
"'C
=
·-=
()bjcct Orientation l{oadsidc Clutter Analysis
@2.5m
0 = sin · 1 (2.5/50) = 2.9 deg1·ees

0 = sin · 1 (2.5/90) = 1.6 degrees
6.1 h Vehicle Induced Ji'alsc Alarm" Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
00/
(l(}fi
00'•
00111
0()3,;
OL-_ ___._ _ __,_....;.. __ _,

0 ?00 ,fQO 600 800 1000 !?DO
Ftt-H Res1,011so to 1/Chi(IO ,nNJJacent l ~ne lHC2 HO$
li,'
(:
~1200
~
3
n.
1000
Truck
Van 800
Center Heam Cmttrll<,am

600
0 10 40 60
-~-I.---~
P.O 100 140
!Mtance (inel,rs)
Semi Tt·actor/Truiler S.1111 Trnctor/l'rnlkr
ptl,,lng lo adja«nt lane
1>assing in adjacent lane
~
--...
--- ...
--<-·--....
~
----
~ 0
;;
0 0
"' 0 0
;;
0
~
0
0
----
0 0 0 0
a,
~ 0
"'
~
(<3,.;,.;:.:,)s&s1nc
~
~
.5
--
:"'
<
--...
::)
:,r.
-
,_
-....
:.l
----....
~ ':-
-
--= ::.
---
~
::.i
'"'
~
-
,.Q
~
C
..,
C
-......
~
----.... ---
:..
~
-....
Q,,
:.. ~
~-
--=-=·--=
•---:,
"C
C,
~·
C
C,
◊
<-,
"''-'
~
"'0
;; ~
0
<:,
""
0 ;; 0
" "' C, C
:,.)
·--- ·--
:..
~ e.t
~
~
i:,r.
~ .r.:
..J oc. =
i::.> ~
-
""
6.lb Vehicle Induced False Alarm Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
M
('\ ('h
(I 05
n UI
(11)1
., J
20, ~co '200
FLAH Response b Veh tie ,n M:a,eol tan? lfl( 1 JlOI
.
f 1000
Accord C
"'"'
""
~ 800
600
Van
100
Center Bcmn 60 '

l~O
(i1&tai1te (r,rnfors)
Accord
1mssi11g in adjacent lane
6.1 h Vehicle Induced Irafsc Alarm" Vehicle in Adjacent Lane
o or. Fl.All 11ewor$Q fa 1/eh•,f~ •e A,iJactr,f ! ~,1r mr J R09
o t)S
005
OQ4
005
f 004
OQS
fr 003
g 002-
0:
~-
001
O,.
0 -.....
-~~-~ 1000
__ ,.<'_,,. 1fJ(l:0
•.- 1000
?00 400 600 800 1000
--~,-,.--J
1?00
Pulses (fl"ne)
Dlstante (rMl•ts)
fl NI Hesponse to Veh'tle In MJarnnl Lane-TRCJ HOB

1800
1600
"'
Accord .,.,
~ 1000
a:.
Van
Left Heam ~~-ln--•---1-nnmm--l-- nm--nmLnn- - ,.,.J-~•·~~~n J

•o en Bo 100 120 uo
01slance (rnelers)
Accord
passing in adjacent lane
0 = sin · 1 (3/45) = 3.8 degrees
0 = sin ·1 (3/65) = 2.6 degrees
@3m
12 fl/J.66111
45 lo 65 m
()bject Orientation Adjacent Lane Clutter Analysis

6.2 Hraking Secondary Vehicle .. Straight Roadway
lkl1- r J teton1H'"1 \1:hH. 1 ,;' 11'1'::,\ :{(:~

n l'-
0 .,
0l
(\ ?'1
,;·o l
O? L
~O l
E
.,
i!
(( 0 1
,,,, ... ,,----- 1$00
,---'~/ 1000
., ,. •• --- -- 500
to{) B◊O 1()fJ(J IP-t'):'.)
I',() (I
f U1St'"~ (fJnH:')
o shnct: {tn(.l!ers)
Br~IJnJ f;(((l~da,yVehHI& rHCI HOS
□ ~
E
E
X: 500
1000
!!l
"
n.
Center Hean1
Uraking Lead Vehicle .)
Van 60
o,stan:e (rr,eMn)
80 100 120 140
(Accord)
Straight Roadway
6.2 Braking Secondary Vehicle .. Straight Roadway
f-,!,a~••19 ~()(UIJ:i",'Vet tl[ lf{() f?29

0'
( ~
(I t' ~.
0 6,,
s
!,
C◊
~04
r.
tl O2-.
Ct
~~-, ..,. __ ,..--,._,...,,-./-1COO
.... -" ,..-...--·\oo &JO

,,<· 4CO
_ _J ....•y.;:.,.. itlO
?00 •oo (,<)0 8(:1(! 10()0 1?00 150 0 Pul?Of (11'110}
P1s!arire (ri 1:lers)
Orah,g Seton'.la''f \'ehi(le me, llO~
IAccordl
~-
E 600
G
400
300
Center Hcain WO
lO ul. -----l """ _j ---~--L.. __ ---l....,,__ _ _ _,

Hraking Lead Vehicle Van
IOOL - ••.
0 40 60
n,s•~r to (m.1",o
80 IOO 110 HO
(Accord)
Stt·aight Roadway
6.3 Ont-of-Lane Vehicle Clutter .. Straight Roadway
<JuW l!r,s V.h't'e ClctH • S!<a 9h!-TRO RI 1

OH
(11?
02
0 I
015
€
Io,
E
~
n:005
0. -~~
0 ·-,,...,____ .,..._,.,,._,A/010
1!Ca
!3 -------.,...~--...
100 "'-,,""'>-<' -
-~- $10
- 1:$41f#.lit!Km- --- I~◊◊
.I
aoo 1(,00 150 0 PtMes fh{)Jt,}
OsBr1!~(1rt-Mrs)
0,,1 Oil ane Vehltle Cl,J!tvr S!•alJ!\1-TllC2 fH 1

1&00,-
'Accord'
Truck
Left Hea1n
Accord Passed on Left Van --~--~-----~-1--
IOC no - -~J
W!
by Truckfrrailcr
17:37:28 to 17:38:36
6.3 OutwofwLanc Vehicle Clutter - Straight Rondn·ay
OJ1 c'Lan(l' 1/'21,!~le (' Jf~r S1rd ,tit lHc} rno

"'
0(
08
0 ,,
•• 06
;,.
E
f
~o •·
!:
.,
il
er O2
,.,...,,.........·~ 1500
(ii
__,,,,,..
/~ soo
-~·· <0~~
?00 400 ('Jq < I tf'"' 1,111 -,,:·
EO 0 p,;;es fflme)
P1s1,r:(• (1re1e1s)
Ouloftsr,~ \fer. :I~ Clu~er- S:•a1gh! JR Cl fl!O

HOO
... - ..._ ....._

t efl l<rn:k cut~ ,nto
Fl Af'l fa•>~ 55 I 200
,15 1000
35 ~ eoo
.,
(:,
n,ght truck hangs 25

t5•?0m rn front o!
3"'
a.
000
c<1r 111 fell lano

.ell tnx~ even w,t11 car· 15 400
52 05 200
ll1g•,1 tm,k OVOh \\i!h ca, ..
High! t,uek onlors steno
Center He: Lei! ttuck ontors scone ·•
176155 0O
20 40 6~ 80 100 120
___j
HO
o,s•~rre (meters)
Accord Ph
17:51 :56 - . , . ........... ,.
...,.
6.3 OutMof"IAmc Vehicle Clutter - Straight Roadway
07 vul oi u~~ Ve•,1: •ec uw S'H gt,: -mo HI o
Ov
08
o•,
06
5"
§.
go~
>
E
lo,
o>'.. __
0 ·-----........,_ ~.,,.. ----··"- 3009
so--..._, __,,...-, ,~oo
-~ _...,.,....-<
100 '---..____ _,,. wco
~M.,.,. -- ~-J
-.........,<' •.r·· ISCO
?0) 400 6(l{l 800 1000 1~00 ISO 1000 PJ'l!I (!1'1'1•)
n-;!.a:r1tt>(fl'('•ers}
Oul oflan~ VeMtle Clu~er. sua•gM lflC2 ll1 a
.... _ _...,, ___

M 05 ,t~v
45~1200
n AR ef\\ern tum •· ~
Car cn1ots tum E
fLAn on straight - 31, ,;W30
g
I LAil enters tum -- '5
Ca, enters tum 25 Q. 1900
Trnck enters tum •·
Center He: -L .... ..1 _____ ,.t _ _ _ _ _ _ _ j

52551210
Accord Fh 0 60 $~
C¾S!3nrn (mele1s)
100 llO HO
17:53:00 .. .. , • ..,, W. A '\.I'

6.4 Intentional Lane Changes "Straight Rmulway
HC! l'l)Hw.ttl,Ol?!l)) ; ~~~,,:,,i l 1·; (r;r,;~s :'!'J t~ P~~!,~;1 ;n:1 f\J
07
0(,
08
Oti
i
5'06 ,,I
s:,
04 ~
tii } ~~
1(\3 t
;;
a 02
02
0 ,/'
0 .<// f(l)
01 ·wJ
. . . ,.... ><,,.,
?(() ~(l)
~~M~;:;-= • .,
00) fl))
1?00 EO 0 Pe's; ,tT rr 0)
Hvw !1 :t:i .. ~e (tr,f'e,-:.i
18:48:37 • Begm FIio
!·1.,1, :si'La•,,C>,1q1, S!rJ )t.!Rv1h;1 · 1f<(I PO

·17 F.CO
Accord 70)
49.O70:ll
Van in center
of fell lane•· :49.01 .,, 'W
Van rnovos lo left lane •· 58{.
.57 .,,; 1,(1)
"
3
n 111
.47 ;m
1(0
Van Accord in front of Van•· 370

0 JI (Q m O"J '(I) 1;{)
• ~~--~ ..J
ti<)
P~t3" 7
f {r• ~~~·sl
6.4 Intcntional I,anc Changes Straight Roadway
M
11r.;1 llJFh,,J,OloW' r'?~ 1 : .. ~

1
L-, .. : t .. ,,.;?) •~''1 ii :?n:f,Hf· lRl·t f..9
016
() 14
q/
0 ,~
()1 ,- G'5
i
s ~•:
l 0(13 ~ 01
J O(fi
'
C
(woo,
()(I.I
0
0 /''
...,~-<.,- fl:O
Ofl' .,,<,,, WJ
-~- ,,,,.--:---✓ tJ)
!W!f!~- -- -__ J ~ . . ~<---~.,. J)}
[.(I) 4('(J ((I) ((I) 1(0) 1,1)) 1~1 O
f\19)
P:,,; (f•m>)
:1 sh•-;,(, fft 1s}
18:56:i14 • Begin file
ldpJ , 0 3' l ir•, Cl r91; <:m ;•t. lln11,1y- TR(1 ~'9

1(1)
Accord t4£0J
Accord exits scene •· ·OB :m

,05 -~-
Van In center of ., :57'04 E@
left lane S
Van moves to !Bit•· .57.01 t
lane .!J :OJ
0
Van Accord in front ol Van•· :44 o

_ _ A_J
0 XI n €1) 8) 1~ 1Xl llO

D;ta·,:e (m,ler,)
6.4 Intentional Lane Changes" Straight Roadway
lfl :1 ll!O lh•Ytl, (Pc) W)
1-i~r 1 :• f LY.., ~. ,, )2; S1f1 i' q_, j}•"~! ~r.,_~• RlfJ
0(11
003
om
')('(,
1°[1'
,.
001
r
I,
~00!
E
:,
,◊03
&002
O('(J
✓-"·
/<-' !(I)
0(1\J, ,/'<, OJ
..,. ,.. _,...(_ 3))
,..._ ...-"_,.._ ,OJ
.J l't1 ,,-; 1(0
€1)) fl)) 1((1) Iii)) r\':e! frur,e;
Ftny, r,·13':-;:('r.!!th)
19:05·32 • Begin File
:•ie•,• .•'•J' I;,,, (hn" s,,, iH R,,;Jh, 1 . l½(l RIO
Accord
.52 t(O
·.:-xo
E
C,7.-0
Van in center of left •· ·43 f·
lane .42 it. xo
1W
Van movos to left •· :39
lane !OJ
~l)
__,
Van Accord In front ol Van •· -32 O
0 XI n liJ
(••la<• (t•,e:•·s)
6.4 Intentional Lane Changes Straight Roadway M
Ill.I mt ftn:,,J,Ol•)fil) l•i~i? 1 ~r; l~,., 1

:• ;r,3;: • S~r;1'-• ~73':r,;y. H?(l fil1
GI
0(,
)5
o,
5'0£
04 s1:
f _$'04
I'
Mo3 ~
•• O2
Cl
0~
0
(1
,,.,,,.
.,/"~ EW
Ot
/.x~/ :W
.... ..,,...,..,....,"" ((J
WH1!4t&f:ltlmr,,.,,..
?'..I) ,VJ) rro F11.1 ,~,11 ,;.-,) ,~,; xr.
P,_,m(f,H)
Hny, () :t~"t~ f,.,.e~E':}
19.18:15 • Bogin File

...
1., !~rt : ..,11 t ;r? Chr ps S!·a i~ P.olt'11, THr t P1'
·55 ffl)
I
Accord
1/.1)
~f~e~;~;~ecenl~r 36 y.
.35 ,; «I)
Aocord moves to left •• .34 g
-;
lane o lO
Van Accord in front of Van•• .15 o

0 11,0
Dst!l.":t":n~a-~)
6.4 Intentional Lane Chnngcs" Straight Rondway
HY 1 ft1;> fh..,t i; tlo 1• t) )der 1 .·;t!l·1~( .. ;·1H $'r;i~n<>;;:)fi¾J .,1;c,1,12
(\?
01D
1)11j 1;
('1&
S'o 1~
01?
!\
rr1 o, ~ 0'
E
:~oco :!
&Cl6
000
[I
001 0 .,,.,,,,~-/''1i,:o
,. \(f.0
~/
00? ,<
"-
_, / 9:0
"'">t'
~)) 400 (I)) (J)) l'.1.0 '
,m 1'0 0 i\ ! ,;s tT mf}
1
Hr?l D,tn,'o,:e·;)
19:28:17 • Begin File
'pl:~ l Lv,r ( 1,v 1.:s S•ra ii! q~if1¥iJ lf~(t R1/
29.07 'IUJ
Accord
:57 ro:1
f
Accord in conter :47 ~ €(1)
of fell lane •· :44 i~
Accord moves .. 41 n
to loll lane :37 ten
·27 ;Q)
Van Accord 111 front of Van•· ·17 o

0 m
(),,13·,:~ ("1lir$)
6.4 Intentional Lane Changes .. Straight Roadway
1n;~1 n1:?,1 n:).:-vxi; o r:i 1;,,.o ~w• :,,11 ln Cti·qei s"ig¾t P~1;t,·,,r- TR,;1Rl31
0$
1)4<;
()-1
05
0'.15
fH
01 '.?-
t
.;01
t·o?S ~
lj H\2
f# 02 .:!
~
01
015
01 /.,.,,..__,,.
,,,../ ,:(0
()f'f., .;<__ .,.,..,.,..~,....,, 1)))
.,,,,,,----- !IJJ
---~'
l'/.1 <1(1) (i".I) oco 100) j;(O 1!1/'; f'~',Ffl«!i:J
ft-o;p O,\!aoc, ('1•,te1;)
h'e·•~?1,1La,~ Chvq.; - s"~ g>I Rrn.t"l1 - :\lCl 1113tl

:0909 1200
59 1(0)
Accord
;49 8))
. i'
l\i:cord ,n center £
of left lane •• ;39 ~ ((r)
Accord moves·· :37 ~
lo left lane ~
29 J(O
Van Accord in front of Van •· :09 o~ ;o 4J w ro 1(0 1;0

,___ - -J
1.!.J
f) !!a•1.& (r•~!n)
6.4 Intentional Lane Changes" Straight Roadway
lll':tP11 f\.>rvJ>◊t"tt(l) '•!f'•' :·i' llf•! (>,,·1•; $•,, 'l"' ro1:1,,1. Ts(2 Fil
07
Ob
951
05
l
s-•J( J
f l
0,1 0
t Jo~
I C
Jin :;
&01
O?
0
0 -- .,.,.,.,,.-<"',,.,.,..-#~ t(O]
(11 ,,.,,.,..< ffC
_,,.,<r El)J
....... _..,.--<.. hTl
J ,-,,·· ;ro
;,(I) /;(() 00) ((Q 1(0) 1~\I) l'.il ,_; r,,1,oofT•n,)
R~\/.l (1 :' ;.- c~ :(n~i' ;J
20:41 :42 • Begin File
I l<•,',C"l' L;•,~ Ci i·7,s · Sl•i•;M Ro111r,y ill(? 1114

.3? l((O
Accord !(O
.22 ((0
7(0
Van in center of
left lane I Accord :l 2 -;' RO
out of scene •· :11 €
Van starts lo move •· 07 ~ 9))
to left lane ]
.42.02 ;_ 400
lO
:52 ;(I)
100
Van Accord In front of Van .. .'12 o

0 ;o 4J 00 ()) 1(1) 1?-)
J
110
p sHr~e lir e~ SJ 1
6.4 Intentional Lane Changes - Straight Roachnt)'
'tf~P1~, f\)f(J} Oto 1!:{fl '{i-•,' :~,;I lvt :• ,, a:s ':••; t' r.(';j'u~f -1h.(i ~1~
01
)r,
Df
05
r .. Db
s
04 ,,r
.>
!c ~~~
(
jo3 t
?i'o,
O?
0
0 ,,< ~-· / .,.~ 1:(0
01
_,,,,,/· I())}
........ .,,.,.,.,,.·"'-e
-..,,·"' !:ID
~)) !,Cl) ((I) (ff) ll)J) jro:) !'.(I 0 P./,H (Tw~~~
fhr~, Dsu~i~~ t'"ttes:

I
u l•iffi•Y l' l ~•,; 0 l'-J~; SIi l tHloi1,<'lf · lfll'.'2 P.!',
Accord
.,-
Accord 111 center f
of left lane •· .57 ¢
~
"
Accord moves·· ·5? J
to lefl lano .45 mi
Van Accord in front of Van ••

11,)
D:h":? {r• %-!~r~)
6,5 Tracking New Secondary - Straight Roadway
1,1:1 n11 n,,,,>i 0101;,rn 1ra:\ "?i,tN:F••,j; J S:r:1Ji:Pt~},1_-i). ·;-:i F'4
04S
(11
0'.-1'.i
05
04
03
'.>'
s ()7\
fr::13
! JE{\/
~(12
¥"
ct O1
016
01
0
0 _,/_,.,·'1wJ
,./
_,-✓·' fi)))
ore _.,,...,,..,.<
______, ·--,,/ 9)}
ro) I.()) (l'I) 8)) 10C0 1:W 1:IJ 0 !'u';e, (l cn,:l
Fb"J) [J,1,,u(rr*·i)
',),~~i 1r:e-NScu1h'r•f11 ,ftRvaJ,13y 1RC1 RU

Accord
2
38 (fll
'i'
Accord Accord 1in center t,
of felt lane ·• ·28 ;' cro
1 Accord 1moves • ·25 -i
to loft lane n.
:18 1,(0
.01:08 l(I)
Accords 1& 2 •· '

WJ
Van in front of Van !· ,,,,.,, (r• e:c·s)
<,.5 Trackin~ New Secondary "Straight Roadway
•J1'1 f{Jl) lh·,,~1;01pl01 T,e:l,~? l1'f d S: ::!");•, ::,; r1 f)~3!i'l5Y. H?: I F'S
0~
, , .... L
04
ryi:.1
()JS
,•Is,
Ii
01
5 '
f
;; JJ
I'o;,,:; 13
>
~ ~);,
J
P) 02 t)
rr nI
015
0 ,-,~
0 _,..<'' \[OJ
_,.,--•"· f:(I)
----~-- f[J)
$, )~ ::-! !{f .... ..... ..~✓>(,,..,.,.,. (Tl
><' ;,)1 •
;<)) Ill'.) ((I) (ff) .,.,fl •,-11 1(0 O f\,'$0} ~'fr~)
H1t'.f D,:;-,:~(r,,w1)

H
r,1:t,:-1 ~,~-" S;:uda·r. s·,a tl R:aJ,,,dy • :RC1 r,1~l

; IAc~ordl 9:0
·36 WJ
I 1(11
I
?6 fllJ
.,.
f 1£(1
l·
Truck
:16 "i\(0
Tiuck 1n center g_
o!te!tla110 ·· .11 JJJ
Truck moves •· 38 06 XO
to left lane
1(0
Truck & Acrord in -·

:{J 1-l 00 OJ WJ IX! WJ
Van front o!Va11
f• :!)• '.! '.rret"S)
6.5 Trncldng New Secondary - Straight Roadway
'1 f~>fH{~1 f½t:v"B o•:::• HU t r,~o •i; ,:-•• : e; :· ~;·, : ••; ;h h, ;"'1, lf ir1,:: P153
() 7
06
oe
n•,
>or
04 ,,r
$
[ ~ O& l
I
,◊3 ~ I
&cu
O?
0
(I /...,-<_,.,./-~-· J)))
(11
~- .,.,.,, ,,.-<' ~ 19:C
~- •• . / ., 1[0)
----- J
,n-,_,/ W)
;m l.(l) RO AlJ 1cm 1;,co lJ (•
!',_'"$ n·rc➔ j
lrrq; (! ~1;~(': (fl ::"•~I

i,
! IAc~rol .56 1((1)
1 1
;:~ <q tit:» ~&~\d1 J ~!tl ii~ P.o;1~,3f H1C2 H1£ia
I
I
Truck
e
Truck in cenler ·28 06 ~ rr.o

ol lofl lane ...58 i
:56 au
Truck moves.. :55
to left lane ,46 4(0
Truck & Accord in -- 26 o ---- --...J

Van front of Van O
;I) (0 (l) 00 HJJ l;YJ 10
{J :h"'~~ ('f~\~f~)
,,.6 Trackin~ with a CutNinwStraight Roadway
1f¥~1 H16 f\-,.('(\.h O II_) 1.:,4..1
r,,;1,,'}i1~ 1nC'.1 nS:r;,;•111~1,jMJ• lR(l ;/\f
Q..\5
04
0"'5 !J!i
(l3 04
i:ro J
~
~02
;l
(i'. 0 l
0
0 .,,,,/,.-~ ., w:o
/,,,,,,...·-·
/</ 1((0
L _____ , ,,,<'./ !{O
;m ,,)) 0:0 8)) 1((0 1;,oo 1Y.l 0
fbzy.
f\.'m(hn.;)
DSt.!s",t.e 'rrHPIS)
T,;th·'l vh; Cl1 lfl S!n•t!fh;;J,q/ · lflC1 RI~
Accord
1 23 tXIJ
A 13 1001
., ....... . Accord 2 ln center lane ·
Accord Accord 2 beg,ns I. : i8~l

48
entenng center lane •· ·58:,
fl.lJ
I 2 Accord 2 entnrs .. ;54 _;

scene on left 53J cm
I
I
I
I
Accord I
I Van Accord1infronlo!Van•• -230
2 0 llO
I [• ,1;·-:e t~•ni
(,,<, Tracking with a Cut»in .. Straight Roadway
1B''~H1/ f'ro-Yd-~Otn PfO T•a:~ -~_,,.•1-1a 1:'.,,~ riS•ra•f'R?;;JJ3t· Tt(\;W7
oq
on
() I
06 0~
5'
f, r
;~ ;) I_,
05
t C,
>
f ){
fio4 ~
lP .;
(l'
03 ()2
0
O?
D /
__.-,"xm
,/"' 1:(1)
0I .. , ',rm
........... ,...':<'.
~,,. "'roo
-
;,(I) 4(1) (f.(J rm 10'.IJ l<'"Jl 1'1) = ~ \.'St; If /pt1)

Rnr, 0 SH"1' i fr ... i''.~ 1 Si
l,;tl.•g >l'h a C\1 >'l-flt.i )'! Rc;1,d: HlZ2!{11
Accord
1
A
... , ... ·. :15.01 • 1ff0
~
£
Accord\ Accord 2 in r. t-. roJ
~
g3 ··
~
2 cont er lano ..
...........
I
Accord 2 moves·· :42 ;t
I toward center !ano :41 · rm
I Accord :> enters scene .. 37
on luft .3 t «o
I
I 21 XO
Accord I
I Van Accord I in Iron! ol Van•· 11 o
:u w
~---..J
2 0 0
Cstr:e ir, e~:$}
~) 1[() 1JI 1W
I
6.7 .. Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range .. Straight Roadway
HY::t fH/r1 fh:rv~b 1(i')f\; 1:))1
(H'
~! 10.. 9\'fJ, :I; ( ~;r;r ,fi Ra~;; - lRCl nu,,
(11
r,1
1
OVil
,,
O?
I, 5 J: ~
f t
0
f ',; 1 ii
l
)015
io,j:
0 '
fl -..,,~ ,,,,
• !l.l ----~,,,.:4: ,,/"~o

f
1'.0 ···-.., ...,< ,,
::{I) 1£0 ((n (fJ) VO) t:>.1)
1'1) 0
!bv, "';;,(111r,•)
DsH11r~(r•Ht 1 :;
__ ... t. ...
__..,..,., Accord:.
15:23:55 · Begin File
EHviJ Vrl, zI~ C1.,1g, -r, ij~'ije lRCI Ht7r1
·······••<" :55 1;,:o
.,t
:o.
.
,------'"... :~:
.:...a,;,. Accord in center :35 oco
oflane •· ·30
Accord moves to •· :28
l-Cnler lane .25 WJ
Accord e11ters scene
on felt l 6
Oncoming truck passes•·: 5 t-0)
~ in right lane
© Cycle begins entering •· :07
center lane 24 OS ;w
Cycle enters scene •· .03 ,
Van on left 55 J'. Ai- - "~.l- - - _,1_ - _, __ J
Accord 0 ;u H &) 8) 1)) \.:I) 1(0

e.q~1,ce :-r€''t·s1
6.7 M Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range Straight Roachvay w
Hi ,1 fH8 HY,.t!t1 (!Jo t;HJ

":•• ~ l • ,} .:. ·1 .'I!' ~ f, .r ;; Ti,,· 1f I':
n--,fi
◊J
Ol
(I~\
,, 0 J
[:,
C? ;;
s J~l-
r.
)015 f0
;f O1
01
0
,,
,,...,,.,
-~</ 1:{f}
/ ''.f.ll
.,
:m
,O'J .\(I) 0:0 ff)') 1{)'.l) 1?(1) 1'{1
r /$~: n'•,?)
n,9 , Ds~;r~; '.',,it: 5)
14:52:53 - Begin Filo
~'•M} .·e~ ('e ( /fe• ~, P3;' {: TR~1 WB
I I Truck
I T1uck mcenter :43
I of lane 38
I ~ t.: Truck begins to•·
enter ceritor lane
.35
33
:n
··<·
.·O·
-~
.;
f
I : <t>: ·23 ~ em
I .
IQ
--1 II
Truck enters sceno ·· ·18
on left
Cycle mcenter ;lJ 4(JJ
"
t~
0 Q.1 lano •· oo
m I 1,yclo enters •· .06
center lane :53.03 r..o
I Cyc!o ontors scone •· ·02
onlefl
I
1 I Van 5:l 0
ry :o C OJ ff' 1(1) 'J) '/,)
Truck I1 (,,,11· c,; (•r,1,•,\
I
6. 7 " Strong Vehicle Clutter in Range .. Straight H.oadway
lH ;>P'B B"(,'ff.t; tUJt:>l'ttn :;•:';\e} 'eC':W E,r,::i TF,:lfdK
o~,
04
o:t; 051
03 ~j I
>''.>25
!·
i O?
01t,
;:I:!) (00 (I)) iro 100J l;Q)

r '-;:e~
l (111 it';
f\Y9J (1 s~,~,:e ~ri·r!e t:J
15:39:38 - Aegin File
S:•r-gvi~a•, (1.•1,, ,,, fl,,,,, mo Rl8

w:o
Truck 38 2'0]
,t
. .
:O
·'<·
. o·
.: (0:.
.Q Truckalcen!e1 :381 :nJ

u. of lane .. ·35
(l) Truck enters lane •· :31
Truck enters scene •· ·~t

Cycle in center of lane ·28 HXO
yc!e enters cont. lane _: : 2too

Cycle enters scone •· 0 .
Van ·4008W1; J ,, ___ - "J, - J. ,,
0 JJ at) tl) fl) 1[I) l?,} 1!1)

Truck (J ,t;,:e (.- ,Wsl
<,.8 Vchkle Chttlcr In Azmuth
n1,1 W'Jfh..~:Lt> 7,-·ot,l 1.v,J Vet, :Je C1Jl'.~r 1 A1r1,J'h · lf.. \ f, 19
(1,5
(>3
(14,
I
ox
'.,') l
r
02 :;
t ~ J;
f f
(~01& ,!
i U1
01
0 ,,/·1'f0
..,.. ~,.,
7•--...........
.
~ '-......,........._
ocr, _,,../ l[((l
(I) ",,..__ /
..<
100 ---~, •• ,, / ir.o
I; ~ro (!
0 (\I) ,,co cm !(l) 1(.-0 1~~1)
"S (hi")
I\HJO :)q;",tf {Ft!f 1:}
·············· Vch c1e c•..1w ,~Alll1Jlh 1fl'11'19
' ~ ..... ". lffOj
Accord: Accord l.
Truck 24 140)
2 1 Accord 2 & Truck exit •· ;>O
sceno In outor lanes
··,.;···••' :141,m
·o3.04 ,.} 1mJ

'--
"
C
·54 S €1))
(l
Accord 2 & fruck next •· .44 (OJ

to Accord 1
' Accord 2 & Truck enter •· ·34 400
scene III outer lanes
Accord Truck
2
Van Accord 1 in front of Van •. ·24 ;ro c_ -
o ;o ~{) cl) fl) 10)
~~~
1;.IJ
~ .• J
1W
[}1Ef1: ce (n'e!ets)
6.8 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth
11'1';:!Rl9f\>:>:«h :\'1)1◊ 1~1.(l Veh :'f f-1<..Her ,, ft;wc111, - rr,;2 Rt9
o.i;
(1,I
o·n ~r
01 ~,
5
E
ho~·b }!0 l
>"
102
f.
t 1) 2
(115
&01
QI 0......
0 ·,,, 1S'"J]
!I)~--- / 9))
100 ,..,_______ --... ,,.,,.....,,..,
·-~----'
,ZI'.) 4(1) llYJ £1:l) IIXO H<U I~- C
J\ •i~s ([1n1)
l\cw,;p 0 !'ls:e (M?!e•;!
I ...... , 1 I 18:11 :42 · Oegin File
: r· · · · · · · . I 11 Veti,cie Ct-it!er 11 Azm.,!h • 1P~) rm
·····"··· I I .
1:f.0
Accord\ I I .42 1;,:u
2
I IAc~rdl 1 : Truck
I I 11(0
I I
.. +"I' .. I
,··n
I
I
I
I
Accord 2/Truck •• .32 1Cl.1)
exit scene
i' [(I)
(
:22 t;
•"
(f.l}
Accord :?JTruck even -- :t 7 & l(IJ

with Accord I
I
Accord 2/Truck ·•
w ........~
:I 111 enter scene
I
Ac~ordl
I I Van I : I Truck 111 ""'°' "" ""'' ,iv,, . "', '° !) &J ti)
0i:1a",:~ ('f<?!HS~
1(1) 1:1J 10
I
6.8 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth
m::>1~~JR,.-v,1, 1r1J10 WJ) Vrh ~1e c1.11•£>r l'l A1mv'l1 • 1r, :; PJ;
0l
om
Ol>3 n\
om I fJl
~
(t(i} t·
"i' 0(1~
¥ ($f,
"
C
>
Ii r-OOl
J
Ji OOI ',;
re oo;,
0,,
n ·-....., - ~ - /.,.. -~ 1'{1)
V ~•--, //~~IJ
-...,.~ ,·<
l(l) -•• ,_...._ _,,...- ({()
";<
-----l---~' 19) 0
«:Q r.m (l)) 1(l')) lro)
P111 >H(fir,1{>}
fh'"lyl 0 s1anre {rr.rfefi~
•' .... ~
• • • •••••• ••• 1, • t.
Ve,~l:le (,f.,!ler ,n Azmo!h · TR.:? R;Q
.44 l!t)J
Accord Accord Truck rruck exits scene ., :34

2 1 Accord ;> exits scene ·· .?9
• .?3:19 1(0)
'i?
f
(..
,·
Aci::ord :>JTruck even 1
1•~th Accord 1 •• :56 ii.
·54 WJ
Trock enters sco11e •· .52
... Accord 2 enters scone •• ·46
Accord Truck
2
Van '
~$ 4) cf.I 8'1 '[I)' \;{) HO
l' :ta· ·t !1 01 £'-:l
6.8 Vehicle Clutter in Aznmth
nl :?-f-Q\ rn·n(i-J 1fflln 1rm :••:·3 '/ft : ~ (' ...~tt• 1 t trii.'~, "F,:,; R2'
(116
0'-1
~.
{) ,2
(JI
t
' 11 I'
~
f (lf)J f 01
f· [
~oo; .::
,I ory,
I),, .,,,
0 · -C ...._. . . ~ ~ ~ , ~ .,,,•
JJ ---..... ,.,,✓-,,.,.,,. 7fJ)
--......... ✓<./ 15)}
1(0 '----. / _,,,/ 1((0
. . . . ,,~./ !00
fl)) &"I) ((r) Em 1(((1 1K(l l'.l'l '; Pt 1=t:;: rr •n"!)
ltn;r ['l'•·•cr(v,!Pll
...... , 18:35:43 - Begin File

1••·············· . S''O\J Vt~) ~l(! Cl iHe: t'> A1tM!h. H~,~•°? P}1
, .........
!Accord! Accord Truck
2 1 Accord :>JTruck
.
········••ft
exit wine
w Accord 2/Truck •· :57

enter scene ·53 Xi)
Accord
Van Truck Accord 1in front of Van •· :43 oio -;o1 -i ~ . -1-
2 0 lj) ro 1(1) 1Xl HJ
[ ,la·(~ fr,~'.,,,l
6.9 l\!Jc1·ging Traffic~ Straight Roadway
1rr_;1 ft-~) H•uth roto4?0 •i':•;"~T 1 ; ~ : ~••1:HP~•tj1t3t· TPt1 P~~)
08
~,
013
Ob
:/lf>
g
"
Jo,
fo4
f: E
ti 03 ~
&02
O?
Of
---~ _, 100
m I,()) oco oco fOCI) l::>m f'dm(f,m;,)
f\•YJ.l [1;1,•,,;(rc,!n)
Ar.cord 2 Irias to 11 :52:18 - Begin File

merge between Van
& Accord 1, btil lh•g '•l In•; ~•·, J1! fl•;j,,,r lFC1 PX!
nover does.
Accord .38 l(I)
1 ;$)
., ....... . Accord 2 onte1s and :t))

oxds swno lrom right •· :32 '8"
! Accord f '"'I)
l:,"
. 2 "
2a;xo
. ,
ct
' 100
10)
w
'Jl
Accord
Van 2 Accord I in front ol Van •· ·18 o
0 X w ro 100
---¥ J
10
[' ,r,1 :~ fr e~.,rsl
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Curved Roadwny
H 1~1 rt>.?. n • v~J• :,;s.Q to 1 MJ vei :'~i•~J'.!Jfa'seNa·ni (r,,11!011· HK! f,[.!
01
0(1)
om 01
001
000
003 S'
£:
¥00:,
~(1(6
~
ioo1 fOOI
,.
?,
o: OD;?
0.03
0(1?
,.<;..,,..//,;m
,,..,,
</,., a· u.d
..,<~.,...,. .0
..__,/,.,., 0))
J
;m 4)) o:o rm l(n) 1;:rn 1!0 ';ni @
I\~
l\lm(llf'l,!
0 !tl~(; (t"';i!·,J
Vf',cl? Muc,d f,.',e Nl'll,; C·r,9:J !lo1 TRCl 1m

:52 !Xll
-
11(0
-- :42 1((0
Accord in front •· :3B 9))

of Van
·32f f(O
Accord entors scene .. :30 s
.," 700
"
22 £ !(0
~ - ___ J
14•)
f',;h• :, (•r<>le•s)
6, lO Vehicle Induced False Alarms Curved RoadwaJ'
w
111'.:1 l~YJ n,·,:d, Olofl~) V;• '•l•J:•dfl';e/.l;,"s (,•,tjflei: IR;:'1 fm

O(•lr
1
O{t)
fl'))
000
5,-0CI,
(\(],\
g,
s· "
Jo0,1
s,
joro f:
~
&oco
0(1?
0 /•
0 _.,,,-<,/ 1(0)
001 ,,.,...< {I))
..,-;< ffJJ
-...._ ✓-----<: OJ
(0) ((I) tlfO
, J
1:'00
,in."o xo
,(I) P.Jm(Twi)
RnJ:t [ ,•a·:e /rre'F,)
17:57:02 -Bogin File

Guardrail \/f•,·'e'r'.•, dh';,J.'i•os C•,•,.jP,l;! rn,:, fl2l
~~_......--
i~f
Accord in front of •· rm
Van on curve j,
Accord enters scone •· ·26 t=, .m
"
:22 ~ KO
n
:OJ
:1?. XO
1(0
.02 J
;I) Ii) El) SJ lO) 1,1) Wl
Ds!ao•:e (tre!E<,)
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alurms - Cul'vctl Roadway
11r:1 m<llb, "'' 10) I? ml Vf',(!t 1<J,:tdf s'1e th· 0
,; Cv,e,j flQ11 · TRCI R24
O~l
01
01
0~
>'03
1:,
$. ,."
J; ~02
t
;;
o: 01
0,, .
~ -...,~
0' ~
93 -
/~
/'"'"/ flJJ
. . .,... <__,, roJ
1(1) ' - , ,,<''/ l(l1
-- ___ J ,, -✓-/ :;m
:?(I) 400 rm 8:0 1(1)) 1:?(l) 19) O Pv'tB(l,'ll,)
I\Yg> [>,1•a•:e (rr,ele•s)
Ye't'.'e !•l,Ked f a!se /•h-n,s, Cumd Rod - TP.CI 1124
Truck exits scene •• :38 f

C
'36 .,@
Truck in lront of·· :35 ~
Van 00 Clll\'O &
:(0
Truck enters scene •· ·30 '
• ...l.tt-- _ _ ,1._ a__ l I J

:o u ti) f.O 1JJ [I) Wl
D,,1a·,;(•1·e!!'!)
3
\ \
\
\~
'(~
...
~~
;;:
---......
,;
-
,:;,
r.
00
§
l.'")
i2 §
,,,
~
"l':
<;,
"''
0
9
ij e,
{.vi:.u•.J -:.~~lr'd
~
c:,
0 C
c:,
_g i:: 8
u "'
::,
~=
.x;
<.>
c:: "'
0
s
'E
c.>
~ ~ 'G
::,
i=
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms .. Curved Roadways
111'.;l f~,? f\Y(<tl; 0 !◊ 1;, (J v.•. :" 1,,J,-.J 1.'1e M,••o; c ,,.,1 fhil rn:1 ir.-1:,1
0((!
007
000
rm .
OfJ:, '.>,Or.6
F
r
too1 ~001
r. C
~ 5
om &002
ow 0
0 /.~,.--,,,,..-'' w:o
.,,,,,,/ 1(1))
..., ✓.,._.,.,.,,..,.. rm
.....,,~,. :.VJ
rm rm 100) 12(0 1W O re:1o(kn,)

RTQJ D!lir,:e (•,,ite11)
·rn~ 19:02:41 -Begin File
Ve>:!~ h1;:ed Fa'!t J,Ji .,.,s · Cv«d Roal TP.Cl R:£•,
_,,,
--
.,,,. .,..,. ......
9.
Q,
-· -
/
/
/
/
/
I
I :03.01 llfJ
I Accord about torn•· -55
I In front of Van
I
I
Accord in scene on left -- .41 O l
I lJ ;n n El) 8) 1;0 uo
!I
,.;:;
I ( i:tJ-:ce ~'rfte,sJ
IJJ
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Curved Roadways .
lH'":1 H?71 f~1.d.>Oto 1!h) /~•(p'rL~~1r~•5~f.1;•r,,; (,~r1:,jf~oJ -Fi:1Rilt
014
01?
flt
01
yO 15
§.
(1(13
ti' ~" 01,

F.
jooo "
Joos
001
0
0 /..,--··,..,~ w:o
(l(l;)
_,.,.,,,/ l(OJ
..x..,...~,.,,. 9"JJ
,I_)) ,,00 cm ((I) 1(00 '
tM IYJ O P:'m(fm,,)
Fa-w DsW,:P.('l';lets)
~
c:D- - ~
-- -
Ve' ('9 ~d::eJ f i•s~ !frrr,; CV¥tj Roil· HlCI rm,
-
0,:
,,... ,,,,,
,,,. ·30 1(11)
/
/ i'
/ E
/
s
/ ,,."'"
I 0.
I :07:05 Wl
I
Curve gets sharper •· :55
I
I
,,
I Acco,d in scone on loll .• ·40 o
0 ~\) 4'} tfJ lO
[),,la•,(e tw~!•!s)
\((l 1;1)
__ ,
Ul)
§
\' ,..,
\ 8
\
\ t:
\ ~ 0:
\~ -z;-
\
\
\,'
si
..~,; 1~ "'
s./;;
C,
C,
0
:';'
Q
e:
O
C
O
~
0
c,o 0 l7".>
(awi..J ~O~!<id
'V'\,J..}:::1-10A u.m:od
~ ~
-<--
=
~
....
-....
~
tr.
;..
--
,-6
8
c-
sli:~
,
·,:
,_•, ......
""-
I -
s-a 0
,::,
~
~
C• ""
0 0
00
§ § 8
J\.i.-):;noAL.m:0-c:1 :ttu..n,D $'-~Ind
c:; 0
C,
~ -;::
:;,r.
=
-...
-<
.E
C":
--~-.
;,.)
r.r.
-
,.
--
~
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms .. Curved Roads
ll'CI m;f\~;,.IO;};Otol4N SH"lY!t,ci; Ct;'.ternt,ir1rl1t.• TRCI fl':t.i
0~
03
04
0~
50 3
O? E
~: )?
JO,,
1()1(, !:
~
.;
er OI
01
0 _/.
(\(6
0 ,,,./✓ w:o
·~ / < ,./ 1(0)
m:.~~,,,.,.J -.....,,,,,✓ W)
2(1J <II)) 0)) OXl 1003 1ZJ) 15) 0 l'u'm(l1m;)
lb•J> Otwe(r-.ite;j
14:11 :48 • Bogin File
S•1111 Vet,d~ CUl,i >ll Arn,/~ 1RC1 R35
E:.
I
~
"
£
Q
Truck in scene in left lane •· -~~h~-J

;l) !!) w 8) l[IJ 13) 110
D11a,,~ (n ;:n)
§
\ \8
\~
\ P.
\'""
\
\\ c•
f~
/ s:
---
.r.
~""
~
-~
>
;.. 0
F.:
0
s
Q
~
O
{Aw)~l!OA uJr-U..Od
s
C
00 §
;;;: c::i ~
.,.::'
.._ ..£2
u:: C)
::::
C
·a-, § >"'
(l)
c::i 0 0
'E
=
co 6 _g
--
~
.:.i-
'E
§
<
.5 C)
"E $>
0
1t
'-'
<::
0
·=
-=
\C §
2
0
§
tif!. gf
~
C:
s
0 O
S o
0
2:
C
W,:.;I~~
~ § §3
(oJ:w1.1) -c.0~1ric
....
~
""
~
I
\
\
--.
\C
''
''
-- - -
~ 0
1-
I-
0
I I
<::-~ ~
.,.
-~
c::
,_
r,
.:r
c
.,,.
&:
,.._
(.> ?
~ ;::
,,_-
~ -:;:
?
-~s ~
$ "'
~r
•.
.s
"'
.,
.:,
.•. ,_.s;; 8
~
C,
.!!'
oc
--
-!,4:. ~ s.;,
-:::; f .-
~"' vi •.
~
2
05
:::: ~
C,
R:
-:::;
~ oc
;..-
§ ~ ~ § ij ~
~ ';,:"l C>O
;.. 0 ;::;, 8 0
0 0
~
::: ;:;.,.u..)&.;i:o.t, wn:o,c:: 0
?.
(,a;w1_) s@s;nd 0
~
0
c:q
u .SE
u:
,:::
<',
8
N
,;,
~
g
·a, ~
rr.: (l)
-ee
:::
:..
c::i "'
<I)
si
-
0
~
-
~
~
o::>
iii
'E
§
<
-r-.
Q,)
rr.:
::::
-:::;
~
\
---....
~
::: \
\
·---
~ \
~
\
Q,) \
;;... \
-
=
l ,C
~
~
§
\.
''
0
2
"'
''
g §j .;;
:;
&
~
$
-6
,E
::,
0 -- -
8 8 0
C 0 0
~)U..~
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Curved l{onds
IIW':?f~f\).-•\fl(-\"l)t◊ 1!~0 S1 r;;-g Ye' :le(' }tu 'l'~lir ..~•t • 1h(l HiJ
OU!
007
001
0!'13
000 >0(6
g
"'"
JOO!
[
j001-
0
0 YJ-.,.~...__,' -· · · · ~ · ,,,,.✓-,,,,,....,.,. "'·"
....,.
~ ,..x.,..- lroJ
10) '-....._ ,..,/ l((U
''><'"' roJ
;,)) @ £0) (I)) 100) 1?()) 1(/) 0
Pel,;; (h"?i
I\•~ Dsh•, P. (ro,:.,,)

Guardrail
S:wJ Veh•c'9 nttH ,~A11rrJl¾, 1RO Ri'l
/
.,,, ,,,. --- ---
/
/ :45.o5f 100)
/ t;=,
/
I
I
I
I
I Accord entering scene .• 42
tO)
I
Enlenng Turn •· :35 ;rn •• I
I 0 ;I) .lo) ro oo KO 1.0 Ufl
D,;lr:e(ir~t,,1)
I
6.10 Vehicle Induced False Alarms - Curved Roads
H(:>r~u n-.)r1t• 0 10 11.4..) S•r,:'"f/€'1 •'e Cl}!~· - Au •w•~, lh:2 P~
J 12
Of
012
1
I
91
000
i·o:e
loo, "
Iwr,
.~
f;
001
f.
~004
0:
()(!?,
0
0 /., . ,_/"1W)
// 10))
,,,
.,. :1J}
J
''>< .,
cm (I)) t(I)) 1~0 1'./J 0 f ,;,o; (f ~,,)
f\l'gJ D;H~•:, (r •ln)
Guardrail 5•r~"3Vc'1:'efi}l;r nAzrr-i.:t, TR:? RX1

1~0)
.,,,. ,..,.
,,,.. ..,.. ....... --
/
/
/
/
/ "
E
s
.37., WJ
I ""
5
I Accord returns mlx -- ·28 °
I Wl\fl Guardrall returns :27 ~co
I Accord at aboul 60m
I :17 XO
I
I
Accord enters scene ·- :07 o ~-¥~--J
I 0 ;J) )!) w ro 100 1,1) 140

0 ,ta-v.e (r ~leis)
0
I
-...
rr.i
"O
0
~ 0
"O
~
>
~
-..,
:..
~
u:::
C
~
:ii 0,
N
:iitu.r.,C !:J<:t:$1nc
co
":":
:
"'
C
0,
~
·a 8
........
~
"'.,,
(!)
Cl
s: al
c
-
<=
O')
~
0
"'
"2
lO g0
a5 <
-=
~
ti.)
;.;.. !
"O \
-...""
~
\
..,
\
--
"O
\
·---
~ \
,;J
\
Q,) \
;, \
-='-= ~ §
\
'
~"
1
!£
~
'::'"~;---;:::;---;~~--,-~--,8::::--:::=----==::.::=....,.
C O o O O o
V\w)u..~
c;.
\\ 1 :::!.
\ §
I
x-
\
?
..,, OC..•
§ § 0
~
c, 0 _,
(.,,-\1,....,}~;,:o/\ wn'!V,:! \atJ.o...;ti.d",!f"ld ""
<.0
8 ~
<O <O ~
~ <'-1
(Q
::>
0
=
g
~
- .!=
E
e
- 'E
0
-
0 8
::.. <:
~
~
·--
=:.t
--
::.,
:"
~
--
,.::,
P.
"
o:---~~--"'---.,,----=~--.-'"'---""--~-=c
C O O C O o O
(A~ • ..:r~
6. t J Tracking Through A Curve
1rc1 m1,11,;,~,a,oto 11!.'.l Twl q T•it. 1'>ACu,E- 7~CI lll!r
MS
Cl?
i: ;i.:;
fJ. !
(l Vi tto 1€ !
tIi t:
~
E 01
,f 01
~
e
0: 01)5
0 ,,,.~
0(6
0 ,,,,<",.. ':{I)
.,,.,...,.,,., 1COJ
...~ .,..,,.,~•-" 9)J
_, --..,<_,,.,.
roJ .m 0):J ff.I'.) H'.(lJ 1;>00 1:0 ' r11~Hrn-f~}
lhq? (lt 1 ;r1CP(<t£k°5)
Tra:l,r,g lhro•~1~A(·/«· TRC! Rllr
Accord 40m In front •· •• J

l)J
o!Van
D.sti·:e ("~!,i;)
6.11 Tracking Through A Ctn, c 1
1!(;1 HH n,,:yu, () U 1lOJ fo:\,,~Hrc,:~\,\f'v'•i· TQ(t RH,

O:{,
!)3
04 ,,
OVi
f\3
0?
<;
t o,
E
jo15
01
0 ,.,,,..,,,.,,,... ,,,..,
0 _..,..< ;.c.v
_,,,,,<,,.,_,,.,. ·cr.o
. '><; ,;' ff.0
;,"I) l;f) roJ OX) 10C0
·'
120'.) 1:0 O Fd,~s(l<tm)
fmJ) ();t •..,;qcc,1nJ
19:23: 16 - Oegin File
i,a;I OJ !t,c,,,'>,\i'•.rrs TflCl fl,Jr

·31 t~IJJr
.,., ,.
,,,,_. ........ ....- -
·24·06 t[O)
1
t;,
¢
~
~
J
fl
·41 !(I)
Flar bog1ns losing Accord • 29
Accord in front of Van ·· ·16 o

iJ f,!(j
f),s!Y-:e,~,•, 1l
6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth - Curved Roadway
net Hl:H'h1f¥t)OI) "0:~..) 'v~"1 :'~ Ctt!~· ,"t 1~r1 J", ( r1~ j ff:H•df 1RS1 nn
0 1~
01
fl:
om n'
f_om
,.
loo, ~0((,
» ~001
I(
0011• OOi
A
,.,,,,,.- ;rm
/,,,,-"'1[m
,.• ,-< 1(11)
, "'><'
,/...-<r,)1
' .
OJ) roJ 1001 1;.,:i) 1!1) 0 P)s,;(fw)
R.>9) f\;11--:f !'l tlu:j
11 :13:13 - Begin File
Hti11, ClJ'ter ,~ Aun!'~ C~•l?l Rcad11ay lRC1 RU
-- .... -- ..... .....

rrucWAccord 2 •• ·?I 1®
exit scene
' . ,14:13 lXO
. - -.. ~
.... '·.,,.... TrucWAcc-ord 2 •oco
f '·
' .....
,. '
: :~ .. '
'' even wiU1 Accord 1 -- :59
Accord 1 aboul 10m •· :57 f
. ~~ .
··•.'1:(:-t;)' fl., ...
' '
\
\
in front of Van .53 ; o:o
~
~
:i
Truck ontors scene - :43 •L flO
\
···.,·~~\ \
\
\
\
\
\
I Accord 1 in Iron! of Van •· :13 o
0 ;o U 00 8) 'O) 1;o
I
!tJ
I f,k:e{M'ttl)
I
6.12 Vchicle Clutter in Azmuth "Cm•ycd Roadway'
l!LI IHI n-.xd)O!o r;>)(J \!t•: 1, ("flit , Aw :o , _,,,, r::iJ,lJ • T'l(t R3!
01(.)
Q 14
o,
0 17
01
,,< r, •r,
!
1:
roce ; 01.
,,
1,
0(1)
r,
&of}j
(l(>I ,..,.
,,,.,,.,,/ .. 1(00
✓-,,/' 10))
,/
..,, "0
.....,,.H ~---- .... _,_
4(1) 00) (ff.) l(l)) '
12(() 1'0 •J r . ,,; (f•m•)
1
n:n11 01;t;"C€' 11 ~!Er~)
12:10:50 - Begin Fite
V,t,·',OJ"e• ·Aw:, 1~mJR01'lhl/ TRCI VH

!!(I)
-- -.. ....... ~
''
•'
.501;m
- ..... ' tl,·
..... •• /4,,,.~
'',,: ..
--- .....
,· ..
'' \
Truck/Aetord? ·• .40 Km
exl! scene
:3oi a:o
l-.
~
<
\ Truck/Accord 2 •• 20 '3 cro
\ even with Accord 1 °
Accord 2 entms scono .. :12
\ Truck enters scene •· ·JOA(O
\
\ ·11:00 :ro
\
\ Accord 1 in lront of Van .. .50 o
(I ;1) 4,) &J m 1()) 1;0
__,~,.J
(i :fa' :e (t 1~!H))
I
6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth" Curved Roadway
fff.2 R:-fA f"l(,;,)t}l WllO 'c!ff!
07 Vit<,:li Cl•t.\!r ,s /.zrri\l;. (,Ml Rad,,1y • 1R,, f<:£A
06
08
05
y06
04
[ ·i
~ "
)03 ?04
g
~02
O?
0
01 ()
· - - - - ~ , - - , ~ /...../,../';>:I))
........,,, .......... _,.....-< ;o:o
0·- ~~,~':$t~Mkt~iM>MJ.,.._,~---~ J
1(1) '-,,, .-<~,... l!IJJ
0 ro, ,I()) (00 (t;J) 10:0 IKO '·-,</ _.,. !(l)J
fl'O)) l~J) ~J) P,i's,s (kt1i)
OS!ai:e(·,,,teis)
WI,.'~ Clfteri~ Awd~ Cv,ej llrnt.-11 1RC2R.<'3A

?rJ.O
- - ~ ...... ~ .......
.......
.04:052t00
·55 )XO
. - --- ........
'' \
\
\
\ Accord 1in Iron! of Van • :55 tcro
\ ,~!- - -w-1-----~l -----l-

o El) (lJ l;!J 1;1) uo
'I D,w:e (1r•!M)
·-·:.
·-·~
_,-
c § f.: §
:v; ~ ~ ;::
I.()
C',
...0,., (ou:.i ..C
.,,
s.~Sl""lc "' I.()
,:_,., <:'!
0 ~
--
-<-
:::
IS
---
.,.,.., .,
C ~ "" ~
,..
C
':l ;;
( I
I
0
0 0 0 0
J.......,Su.t"'...OC
6.12 Vehicle-Clutter in Azmuth • Curved Roadway
1•r.> J>,;\'!r fb:"tri\ .1100 I) ~O) V,L.'t ('V\1,, ,, f<l((,.1 1• ,:.,-.~) P)ldNlf · lfi".'2 R?cC
0'.6
03
04
o:>-,
>03
O? ,r
r
{f
...,
('
Jo;,
jpoH> F
,!
ti OI
01
0
0 _,,,/·m:o
~/-5'.00
' - - ~ .,.,.,.,,,,. '{\l)
~~----'----'1.m
~ 11.0 fO} ro:) 1(0)
WJ -...., , , / ' ~:OJ
1~1) ((0
f\.'sB(Jrn?;
lhq> Ow,:e('"'le<s)
14;0?.:05 - Begin File
V1),•'t ('.11!110 Mm·.!• C•,•••/j lloldh'l)' · Hl.::21/XlC
- --~ -......
·45WJ
. - ......
mo
~
:25 .-s;,:o
E
~!(O)
~
¢
'' \
.0605i 4l't!J
AW1
\ Accord 3 even •• -49
1•A!h Areord 1 •45 lt[IJ
\
\ 4Xl:l
Accord 3 enters •· 3? r
\ sceno 05 25 ,cru t l • - a~
\ 0 JJ 4) w ro HJJ l:0 ll()

[:,,t¥rn!rr,'n)
I
m -:,,1~1~ nx«(i;0to 11(0 \ €' ·~ 1
-.: ('J'IH ,.., J.zrrl~1 C. ~.~J fb31hly lP1;} J7?1A
07;
(I? o;<:
02
015 ~t{fl 15
w ~
f: 0 I
f 01
"
~
rr (105
0
0 //,.1Wl
~// 1((1)
'-,../ 9))
.,,,,,,,,..,_\,.__ ~~ · - - J
;:w 400 COO l'()) HXO 1:0,)) I'll 0 Pu:m(hme)

lbW () ,t;n,~ (m,lm)
Y,f.,,:>, C•fl~r 11 A1in/h c~,,~j Ro11foay · TRC2 R29A

1Xll
- --
I - +t-._ ~
'' \
\
\ ?:>XO
\
\ . ___)
Accord 1in front of Van• ·31:1:? o
(I ;{I Ii) EIJ !O 100 Ill l?J
\ (I ,!a·,:e ,,~,INS)
I
Jl(:,-;,.J?(i f\-,:,·,,.-;1 11(1Jh-.?:lU \th: 1;(~.'11r ---A?ff ..;~ ~.:'ff)lt~s1'\1J TP:2~nD
O,.<\
O?
o;,.; 1
'
02 '
(;15
s· fro is
F
r >01
E-
~
:; 01
JCO'i
0
0
._..
::,--___ / / ,.,
1(0 ·-....... ~-,A_,-/ xr.o
~:1~4(4\}Y!~OO!l!l/;111.udllirclS,b--'--·---• '><~,,......- 1:(0
ro:, 4'.I) 0)) 0:0 !((l) 1l'(I) 1(0 1((1)
f\TQ}
!\'m{l•m~)
D,t,rre (n- ere,;)
Vel,,:le C1,tm •'• ,\zm•,:h • C•,•rt1 R❖ ,.flflJ · 1!1C1 R?10

2!CO
- - - - ..... :33·02 ,;,:o
Accord 3 even •- :53X(I)

.- -
with Accord 1
Accord 3 enters ••
scene
'' \
\
\
\
\ Accord 1 mfront .. -'- ~--u-~----- -'-~--=---L- . ,1
\ of Van al n t-0 ll) lCO 1;0 HD

D,1a·)c€ (oi~te:rs)
I
-:::....
;;..-,
,,.,-
"'O >
--.....
(f<IU..J._) SOS!'"ic_
""
~
-=-...
s
-<...
·--
; ..
-....,---
~
CJ
·---""
~
~~
"!Z
►
N ~
::
·~
§ s.
!E
~~
~~
C
~~i~- ~ ;; 8 0
0
0 0 c, C 0 C
1/vJ.J)..l,,l!'"~
TTY;> W-0 ftv,tl; 35,~) 1? t,Xl.) \dwf~ (h;-lp ,1 f..w,.~1-i · (•)••-:J Ro1tc 11 t~•~? R29)
O(tl
007
003
cw
Oifs 5-GOO
.h
Jo" 01. '~ '
!'
~
8-002
0 /.A
~ .,,,,.,,•..- W'))
,co'---:~ ___,,// 4:0J

. J
~,.,,<// (1JIJ
1,00 QJ) ro:> 1(11) l?,I) 1!1) Y.f.O
!\J;g (l••M)
l\~-03 0 llln:~ (1'it11s)
\e1, ;'~ Cb'le• ,,, Awd, (,,•,tj lloid~,f !RC, lt~(i)

35 22 :{(O
- - -
-- ,57 !:(O
•
r
.•
f
p
:,
ct
.3? 4'.))J
Accord? next to •· 21
Accords 1 &3
Accord 2 enters scene •· :09
Accord 1ln !root of Van •:34·07 39:0 •·
Accord 3 noxt to Accord 1 ° XI
(l,W:i/,•e:er;;
lbJ
nc>J,:,~,- !Im 1.1.'l))tJ/¼,\1 ~1e}i :'e (ltt,· ,.., /t?rr•.t._, - ( .•,;j R·df-ia 1 . THt} R'.?JE
n ,a
O\b
()1'1
~:
01? ,-.n is
tt1
01
-ll> 0''
t [;
,~ooo ~
&oOJ.
o,,____, · - " ~ .,.~/·cwJ

D ----.,,.,,, ~_...,./ E((IJ
ro '-...___ •...,....,_,_ <.,.,..
/'"' «m
,.'...
t(O ·-..._ "'·~·•r'''_. ,. .,.... fffiJ
ijl'"'-""'•.t!u,~~.l!mio/t""""'•""- - -'
,.'..~l§\~tl!li"..S .. 1(((1 121'.0 1'{) NO
1-0) ,I,)) ((() 0:0 f'.'m(hni)
HY9) filh'r:e(""tt;·s)
V,He 0,1,1,, o A!ll'dh · Cv1el R:i,},,,,1. 11<('2 ff??E

(f.(tJ
. - ..._ ........
·42<:®
Accord 3 oxils scone -- :41
5J.O
Ae<:ords 1,2 & 3 --

mfronl of Van
J!(O l -·- _L ·- -· -'--- - ' -L .t~~- ~- ~ J
'.J it) 0 fJJ m 1Cl'J l,U !lO
. [);IY,,e(•rMrs)
6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth Curved Roadway
R
lll':>m,)e !hxr•ls(',l;;()(,o/W,~ Vfh cle, Ci:"lt, /1 Arri/~ C;~1i! Pot"'"~t · Tfi(2 fi/lF
(I I~
(\1
0 17
000
01
>
-S 003,
loo, "
~Qffi.
» E
~
((
004
001
001
.~,,,,
}\)) 1.00 ((I) 8)) I~ 1?00 l!O [01) P,J'i;s(hr;)

!\'fl]) (\:ta·:~ (,r,i:••s)
\'€ti;le O!IH ,~ Airn}h ('.•,d 'lUefhlf TR(Z ll?3f

~XO
-- -... .......
- ..... .....
Accord 3 enters scene ••
.- ........ ""-.
'' \
\
~
ijl
~\
\[;J,
·31
Accoid 1 h front •· .36.32 B!f,O
0
i¾·
!: -- ,lJ fl ff! fl) 1[1) 1Xl !lO
r -ta·r.e (n e'esl
y I
Yft1:';(,f!e'1·1.--\111i:t rv,~1~:;j")f TR~}t✓ ))A
I):
>'(l 15
!;
~ (l•
[
?.
&oos
/,,...,,,,-··' 1:m
-<./,/ 1((0
......._.<~/ ,,.,.,,. ✓ :{(I
1:0 0 f',.'m(hmi)
Ost~'-:r'('•i:tfrs;
V!h · I f.'Jt,• ,., Aim,1h ,~....,.j 11•111(lJ T~C2 f((II,

WO
-- - - ...............
..... .....
---
'
·54 3• (OJ
'' \
Accord 1begins lo move• :•17
CL
:44@
\
\ ·34 XO
\
\ .34 24 0
0 :I) ~J W 00 1t0 l?J lt9
\ [1 ,!,· :e (m,11,s)
I
N
II (2 Hlll fl) (' I, life) I) ,<n) \.e~ ~,~ 1/tf· ,{\ Ato-
1 'h • C. ·f?~ h'niff;r 1
P() ?f3
Q(f/r
0(1}
D1l
000
s [l I)
E
;;;
Jcu1
,.
:;
l~a2
~ ,, ......__ _,. .,. ..-r-·,,,·:o:e

...... ..,..__
:0 '~~---- ..., _,,,,.-<,... 2:llJ
100 --~ // x.m
J --- ---L. ·-· ..,, ' 1:/Yl
;(I) •W ((Q (l)) '(I)) 1N) E/J 1·H1 ..
fc!m(fn<)
f\l>;>) [ ~,,~ '? h ~t~•~l
15:34:24 • Begin Filo
'lei, ·I; nJJte• ,0 .Aw,/h C;•1t5 R•a-k~f IP• 2 ~}Ll

YJJ
-- -.. ..............
·- - .
:14 ,...7:1..lJ
f
·36.04 t~,{O)
~
''\ "
:54 r. 1):(l
Accord 3 oven wilh •• .50
\ Accord 1 44 1€1ll
\
\
Accord 3 enters scene •· .28 .
'
\
\
Accord 1 infrontofVan 35;>41,rnL
0
-- -•
;I) !) EO
f, :h' ,~ ~rr~!PSJ
00
. ___ ,1 -· --
fOO 1;IJ UD
R
n~ :>B:rc f\X"trh ,1Jf)t> ,'1,r;~) "'"t :'~('/,~· -~!,, ,. -(:.·,!jr:;J 31 rr.i:; o:r~
l)OJ,
!
001f
~ I
001!
O(.IJ ,, (1 ll
,>
r
SOCI,
ft:''.f
!: 1ECf'\!
»◊◊1 ,
r
(,:
('ff)
.,.,.,.,.~·"'
/ ....-<.... .,.. f(O
. "'ff.(
<..,....,-
10) :((1)
....... ,-t../ ..
~ ~--1
/If) f{I) (I)'.) 10'.1) lXO 1'1) ;,(fl) PJ "l (1,,,,)
RH)) D,;t;ore ;rr;t<:;l
\ ft,;l: ('if!Ef '°I t.1n /~ . (•~'ttl Ro ha, TWC.? fYj,jC

@Jr
I
- ....... .,_ ~~
..... -- 1413@
L,
t
·37.0-\ 33XO
n.
Accord 2 oven with ., :47

Accords 1& 3 .44 ,'t(O
Accord 2 enters scene •· :37
Accord 1in front ot Van 36·34 :no
Accord 3 next to Accord 1 °
...
x•
• • .l.
!J w
t ... __ J.
cl)
-
\(!) 1,1) \!,j

Psh~:e fl Pt·,;;
6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth .. Curved Roadway
11~:;, 1rn11,:.-rr<J; :V.-O!o~•m Vt":'~ O.!l!1 •nA111 .'s- C,·,~: !bi•;r :r.c, lH10
(J/>ll
0(1)
000 ,,
(1(13
0ll'.li
f,,
Jor.u
f·
"
i·
i:fNQ
0 ,.,
0 '·,,,_ _.,...,,.-✓, ~:(I)
,;·-,...,,, ,.,..
,..<__.,.. W!
~. '., '>...~.
<' / 4:(1}
o, . .. --L.......- ·---"'~ ---- "~ "
1(1) ~-
' ,~ / .. o:o
0 ;:,;o ',(l) I'm £OJ 10)) '
1:W 1(;) w.o
~,w l'dm'.Jur.~l
Dti~'>"? i'""~l?!S}
WI ::~(•.1.:i,,,1,1m·,lh-C.•,-,;P,1d,,y JR()fl')'.;U
~.xo
Actords 2 & 3 OXil scene .. 34 w.o
·?4@)
:14 }HO
(
·38.04 WJ
54 jXfl
Accord 1 in front of Van 37 31 "<:!JI ,,., tO

I
Accords 2 & 3 next lo Accord 1 J

r
" n 1)) \:tj IL.i
f ·! 1 :er(, ~:~·~l
H~ :>-t-:3 1 A n-.:,~t; Otc, f1(0 \;• '.;( :"~'"'<A?rri.'r r.~,-ejP,:;';,,; 1 hi:2f<)!A
05
O•~'.>
()4 ns
o~, (}A
03
'li
,_.
!_O?"i
i )2
,f 0~
(ll
015
0
01 0 ,<"' -~~- / n 1:{J)
, . , / fO)
. ., .. ,. .....,.,,,<...
~,.,/ 5(1)
), .
?J) Cl) ((I) f(I' 1rnJ 1;\1) 1<n c J•,'m(f.10?!
nv,:;, (I ;•;a(, (1• ,:,·;}
ve~<'~(i,rt;, ·,,.,tr1•/~1 ('.. ,~jP 1·}3:JM~, tF:t P-311\
-- . ..
- -- ......
~
---=fl) ',,,
:39 roJ
.
Accords 2 & 3 I
onlor scene • .30 C
·29 ,, (I))
~
"
""
'5
(i
'' \ \
\
,19 lfJ)
\ :13:09 ,f(I
\
\ Accord 1111 ltont or Van •· :12.59 o
0 ;o ~J Ell 00 'CIJ 1,0 qJ
\ D!ll•(e r,, m,,1
I
6.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth .. Curved Roadway
in:;,, mm 1).<((0-, 11(1) •~ ?4-v .,,t,.:lt (IJ'\!' ,, Atr•\.'.h • (;'1!l R)l1ffif. mo R3Hl
016
010
014 'L.l
(l 1?
5.01s.
f
o, ~[
f, ~ 01
Jooo r
"
&o;J.;
000
001
'fi-¥ '~--J
,,00 cm (IX) 1(00 1KO
P,.';e,flm,!
!¾nJ3 DS!~ri,:e (r·tl€ sl
Vf~,-•, Cl1ie• ,•,Aun 1 f Cv,d Rc,;,/*lf Hl,2 Ji)!B
- - ...._ ..._
' - ............. ~
c,f.
~
~
-:;:"
' \
\
n.
\
\ I
\
\
\
'"°"" 1.,,3 """' ·13A91
Accord 1in front of Van
J 1
.J
II iJ' f.lJ
~ l - - ......k_
8)
r :1;·:e :rr,•,·;1
!(( '
lXI
.1
H,J
I
6.12 Vchicle Clutter in Azmuth - Curved Rondwuy
lfl~H\J1C n,·.-.d; 7.1;,:i I? :n~) V!t :'?i-:t:e•,,.u\7r :~, :,_·•iF~:;J,\;;• lf-:'2 f.,r)JC
0 ,r,
014
l}i
0 1?
,,,,n •<
01
t
t 0(13 ~ 91
f
) ~
&oos
00}
0(11
,,,_,,✓-/Al(O)
/ ¥.,)}
((I) fO) 1(£0 1;>1))

P1.hss {r 'n~}
1\-rYJ) O.H!~C! (~,!l~r;)
v.t, :·, C'Jtw ,,, Azr.-,.'.h. -:v,11 si:1d1i)y. rno m11:

:f(O
-
- ...._ ...._
- :59
Accord 3 drifts Sm back - :5?.
I - -.. ......
~
'-
'
' \
\
\
\
\ Accords 1,?,3 oven ·14:597,!(lJ
I Acrord 1in front of Van ° 0 &)
(l •li•
00
e(1qi 1~H,\
'(0 1.x) 11::;
<,.12 Vehicle Clutter in Azmuth" Curved Roadway
III'Z'mFl Jb;rl"J, Y;OJtJ,1<W \~~-'~( :t;• ~,A?1r:~, ,~,_.,;jF:~J•if r~:)JH 1[l
p',,:
,<,
()~
t :',
.,
1-,
o,s 'iC
'. P'S
r '
C
>
! JI
r"
,~ DO, 1 '
0
0 ,,,,,. ,,, w
,.,-
/ / l:(0
/
1(1) ·-,_ ~ _,,,/ '1.((1)
... 1,,. ' ~ ~- ~~, ..... ' ) , /
~{I) 11.,t) (I)) [nj 10)) 1t",)) l:i) 3:Ul r. 's~; [ft,~;
f\~9, ll s';"f (r•,-1,·,1
,ekle (Vt,, •, Aio,th. Cv,, J !ln11>ay • Hi•~, fi310
- - - -- -59 /tlJ)
·-~ ........
.: i
'39 fH(IJj
t. i
~
..... Ac('.ord 3 dnlls back •• :30 a4 I
again from Accords 1,? ·29;;, :\lJ
''\ M.coal 3 back Ill Imo .. .20
\\ilh /v'..,cords 1.2 ·19 4'.(ll
\
\
\
\ Accords 2,3 nexl to :15·59 :aot... -
\ Accord 1
Accord 1 in front of Van
° ?J !J tO 8J
(' ;!l•,ct w-•t,·;)
l(f) 1& l!J)
l
.,
i;,' '
Jg
'-
,-,
/8
I
I -
;
I
-:.:...
;;... t.; I
"
'2_,
-...,,"--."".. I
,/
l's
c,
-
-t ....
C,.l
--~-------..;.
0 0
f,/\~}.., .tO/\
C
.....:~-~C
//
~
~i.n.
§
.u,.:,.;
C,
~
~..,i~l"'<:!
0
~ ~
~
-
---
,..
<
-N
·--.-
-- :.,
0
·---
~
~
C,.l
~
N
I
j
l
.., l
C
APPENDIX G. OPEN ROADWAY TESTS
This appendix summarizes the results of the FLAR program testing conducted on the open roadway.
The open roadway tests are divided into two categories:
l Background Tests. Conducted with little or no traffic to assess the roadway background
environment.
l Traffic Tests. Conducted with varying levels of traffic density.
G.1 BACKGROUND TESTS

The purpose of the background tests was to characterize the “non-traffic” component in the radar
returns from common roadway objects that will appear within any forward-looking radar’s field of view.
The data for these tests were collected by taking the ERIM Testbed Vehicle on the roadways in the
greater Ann Arbor area and identifying route segments with background attributes of interest. Data on
the following types of roadway background were collected:
l Bridge Overpasses
l Different Road Types
. Guard Rails
l Roadside Signs
l Hills
A variety of data sets were collected on the roadway and analyzed using the ERIM FLAR Analysis
Software. Data sets of interest were further processed using custom Matlab scripts to extract desired
information from the raw radar data. The remainder of this section will summarize the results for the
various background tests. Sample data plots will be used to illustrate results and diagrams provided
where necessary.
G.1 .1 Bridge Overpasses

Bridge overpasses are of a particular concern to forward-looking radars because they extend over the
entire roadway and, therefore, may appear as a stopped object within the primary vehicle’s lane. This
could occur even with radar’s outfitted with the finest azimuthal resolution. Radar designers have
approached this problem by limiting the antenna’s beam width in the vertical plane in an effort to keep
the overpass structures beyond the radar’s field of view.
The TRW FLAR has a 3 dB elevation beam width of 3 degrees. The plot in Figure G-l shows the
elevation plane 3 dB pattern for a 3 degree radar beam. Also, the plot includes reference lines for 12 and
14 foot bridges. Note that the beam height is 0.75 meters at a 0 meter range. This value corresponds to
the mounting height of the TRW FLAR on the ERlM Testbed Vehicle.
Figure G-l shows that the 3 dB point of a 3 degree radar beam does not intersect with a 12 foot
bridge until beyond a 100 meter range. This was an important factor in the selection of a 3 degree beam
width in elevation. However, as the back of the vehicle is loaded with cargo, this beam pattern could be
offset (i.e., tilted) up to several degrees. As the loading increases, the offset becomes more severe, and
the antenna beam begins to illuminate the overpass structure. The tests described below were conducted
to evaluate the extent to which an elevation offset in the radar beam would effect the returns in the raw
radar data induced by bridge overpasses. These tests were conducted on US-23 under the Earhart Road
bridge which is about 14 feet above the roadway.
G-l
:::: ! -,-~---~--,-- -::--- · -"- -:j -+-0 Deg Offset
Max
3.00
- - - O Deg Offset
2.00 Mn
1.00 12 RBridge
0.00 +t-H-'1...la±++-+-HH-++++-H
,__ 14 A Bridge
-1.00
-2.00 - ' - - - - - - - - _ : ; ; ~
Figure G-1. Overpass lllumination-0° Offset
o Degree Offset
Many runs under bridge overpasses have been made throughout the data collection phase of this
program, and no evidence of returns from the overpass structures have been observed. As part of the
bridge overpass tests, data collections were taken with a 0 degree offset under the Earhart Bridge on
US-23 (14 feet above the road). A 10 dBsm comer reflector was placed on the top portion of the bridge
for reference. The data was analyzed and no returns from the bridge overpass structure were observed.
1 Degree Offset
To simulate the loading of the BRIM Testbed Vehicle, the FLAR RF unit was tilted to a 1 degree
offset. The plot in Figure G-2 shows the 3 dB illumination pattern for a 1 degree offset in the FLAR
3 degree antenna. Notice that the plot indicates an intersection of the beam pattern with the 14 foot
bridge at about 80 meters. Therefore, one could expect that returns from the bridge overpass structure
would be observable when the range to the bridge is between 80 and 100 meters.
Figure G-3 is the actual raw radar data collected during the test run. The returns from the bridge
overpass structure are annotated on the plot. The returns from the overpass structure are observable from
the time the bridge is 100 meters from the radar until it is nearly 60 meters from the radar. The reason
the overpass was observed all the way down to 60 meters instead of being.lost at 80 meters as depicted in
Figure G-2 is that the plot in Figure G-2 is the illumination pattern for the 3 dB point on the antenna
beam. The actual antenna beam provides gain (at a much lower level) beyond the 3 dB point and
therefore, illuminates the bridge.
::f _ _ --
3.00
+A --.-1 Deg Offset Max
-11-1 Deg Offset Mn
2.00 12 A Bridge
1.00 - --,- 14 A Bridge
0.00
-1.00 .,____..,...._-W-__,_ _...._____.,____.
Figure G-2. Overpass lllumination---1° Offset
G-2
Overpass Roadway Tests -960620C
Distance (meters)
Figure G-3. Overpass Retums-1° Offset
Overpass Roadway Tests •9:lEJF

. .
3S) ·········-·······················.··········-····································.
..
7.00
6.00 ~2Deg
Offset
5.00 Max
---2Deg
4.00 t Offset
Mn
3.00
12A
Bridge
2.00
1.00 14A
Bridge
0.00
0 It) 0 It) 0 It) 0
~ ~ ro ~ ~ rn ~ t'l v co r-- C)
Distance (meter.;)
Figure G-4. 2 Degree Offset Data
G-3
Overpass Roadway Tests • 9:l:620H
.4[.() •••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••• •••••• ••
9.00 . . - - - - - - - - - - ,
350 8.00
~3Deg
II) 7.00 Offset
Max
6.00
-3Deg
5.00 Offset
4.oo r<-·.,.-:-~---,;-~..:,.;;~~,------_
.. ,_, Min
12 Ft
3.00 Bridge
100 2.00
14 Ft
50 1.00 Bridge
0
0 40 Ell 00 100 1~ 140
Distance (meters)
2 and 3 Degree Offset
Test runs were made with the FLAR' s angle of inclination at 2 and 3 degrees. The raw radar data
and 3 dB antenna illumination plots corresponding to the 2 and 3 degree offset runs are shown in
Figures G-4 and G-5, respectively. As the offset angle increases, the returns from the bridge overpass
structure are observable at progressively nearer ranges. The raw radar data plot in Figure G-4 includes
returns from a mini-van which was in the FLAR' s field of view at the same time the bridge overpass
returns were present.
It is interesting to note that in these test the FLAR, utilizing TRW-proprietary algorithms, did NOT
lock-on and track the returns from the bridge overpasses. The FLAR did, however, briefly track the
mini-van during the 2 degree offset test.
During the 2 and 3 degree offset tests, the maximum exhibited RCS value was -1 dBsm. It was
determined that the 10 dBsm corner reflector placed on the TOP portion of the bridge structure was NOT
contributing to the returns for these tests.
14.00 ...-------, ~5Deg

Offset
12.00
Max
10.00
-s0e9
8.00 Offset
Mn
6.00
12A
4.00 .;.. Bridge
2.oo+Y I 14A
0.00~ Bridge
0 LO 0
C') I'-
G-4
ID.-------,--------
-+-8Deg
18.00 -.------,.
Offset
16.00 Max
14.00
-8Deg
12.00 Offset
10.00 Mn
8.00
12 A
100
6.00 Bridge
4.00 ::.::, ; .>;:~~.
SJ 2.ooJI J 14A
o.00~11111111111111 Bridge
0 Ill 0
Cl) r--
~ ~ ro ro ® m ~
DIS!ance (me1ers)
5 and 8 Degree Offset
The raw radar data and illumination plots for the 5 and 8 degree offset tests are provided in
Figures G-6 and G-7, respectively. As expected, the returns from the overpass structure increased in
amplitude as the offset angle increased. The maximum exhibited RCS from the overpass structure was
about 5 dBsm for the 8 degree offset collection. The 10 dBsm comer reflector which was placed at the
top of the overpass structure was removed and subsequent collections were made to verify that the comer
reflector was NOT contributing to the measured RCS values.
Suprisingly, the FLAR did not lock on and track the overpass structure returns in any of the tests.
Without detailed knowledge of the TRW-proprietary algorithms within the FLAR unit, it is difficult to
specify the exact reason that the FLAR seemed to ignore the overpass returns. However, since the FLAR
was designed for ACC applications, and not collision avoidance, the threat assessment/tracking
algorithm may have discarded the overpass returns based on their relative range rate and transient
appe¥ance in the raw data.
The 5 and 8 degree offset tests were seen to differ from the 1, 2, and 3 degree tests in that returns
from the overpass structure were not observed until a range well under 100 meters. This is due to the
beam illumination patterns as illustrated in Figures G-6 and G-7. Because of the elevation angle offset,
the lower extent of the illumination pattern does not illuminate the overpass until ranges well under
100 meters.
Bridge Overpass Conclusions
The bridge overpass tests indicated that even a slight 1 degree change in the elevation angle of the
FLAR resulted in the detection of overpass returns in the raw radar data. As this elevation offset angle is
increased, the return levels from the overpass also increased. The table below summarizes the maximum
RCS exhibited by the overpass structure for a given elevation offset angle.
G-5 ,
Table G-1. Overpass RCS
Elevation Angle Offset Maximum Overpass RCS
0 degrees No returns
1 degree -10 dBsm
2 degrees -8 dBsm
3 degrees -1 dBsm
5 degrees 2.5 dBsm
8 degrees 7dBsm
The fact that the FLAR did not track (i.e., report) the range to the bridge overpass indicates that the
ACC application optimized algorithms within the FLAR may not perform well for collision warning
applications.
G.1.2 Road Types

The FLAR sensor was exposed to a number of different road types during the data collection phase
of this program. These road types included concrete, asphalt and dirt roads. The tests described here
were conducted to evaluate the effects of the various roadways on radar response as a result of returns
produced by reflections from the roadway itself. The results from the "Road Type" tests are summarized
in Figure G-8.
...
Concrete Road Dirt Road
Ashpalt Road Bounce Test (Asphalt)
Figure G-8. Returns From Various Road Surfaces
The plots in Figure G-8 are range profile plots taken over several hundred radar pulses. The data was
collected with the ER.IM Testbed Vehicle moving down a road segment with no other targets within the
radar field of view. The issue with the various road types was whether or not their relative roughness
G-6
would induce different responses in the radar sensor. As illustrated in Figure G-1, the 3 degree elevation
beam width of the FLAR radar intersects with the ground at about 30 meters. Analyzing the data in the
plots indicates that there are no significant changes in radar returns resulting from the type of roadway.
The "hump" in the range profiles which appears from 20 to 50 meters was initially thought to be
caused by returns from the intersection with the ground surface. A "bounce test" was conducted (see
plot 4 in Figure G-8) in which the front portion of the vehicle was bounced up and down in an attempt to
change the hump's profile. However, as seen, the bounce tests had no effect on the characteristic hump.
The hump and nearer range return levels are part of the baseline operating characteristics of the FLAR
sensor. See section 4 in the body of the report for further discussion of baseline performance
characteristics.
The conclusion from these tests is that the returns from the radar beam illumination of the ground
surface is insignificant with respect to the noise floor of the FLAR sensor. Even the very bumpy dirt
road used in these tests failed to produce any observable changes in radar response.
One other issue which deserves further study is the difference in multipath effects which are due to
various road surfaces. Surface moisture should also be included in further studies. Evidence of
multipath off the road surface were observed on several occasions during the road testing. Multipath off
of the roadway surface can actually allow the transmitted radar energy to pass under a preceding vehicle.
Furthermore, this energy can be reflected off of objects in front of a preceding vehicle, allowing the radar
to "see" objects not in its direct field of view.
G.1.3 Guard Rails, Signs, and Hills
Figure G-9 shows raw radar returns collected during some S-curve maneuvers on a 2-lane roadway.
The returns in the plot were induced by guard rail and metal sign posts located on the roadway. The
guard rail resulted in a much more significant return than the signs. A detailed description of guard rail
return characteristics is provided in Section 10 of Appendix F.
The return levels induced by the signs were generally found to exhibit an RCS characteristic level
somewhere between Oand 3 dBsm. For the roadway dynamics corresponding to the data in Figure G-9,
the radar returns from the signs were very transient and had a very high range rate associated with them.
The FLAR and its TRW-proprietary algorithms did not report on (i.e., track) any of the road signs
encountered during the roadway tests.
Roadway Tests· S Curves· 91lB!3F

!DJ r ·······-·· Open
......................... ·----- ............. -......
Exrtmg Curve
100
:29:01 !DI
Entenng nghlhand CU1Ve :DO
Passmg onccmrngcais :58 _
Oncoming ear out o1 • :56 1me
Vl&W~ll}n E
Ul,.,Vll~&y :52 :
C8J'S -
:51-s@
Entering Lefthand - :50 "-
Curve
:m
:41200
Heading to S Curve - :39
011C0_111!19Car
Guardrail rn front of Van 100
TUllllngleft
0 ~ ~ m ro ~ ~ ~
Dis!ante(melffl)
Figure G-9. Returns on Curved Roadway
G-7
Similar to the various roadway type tests described previously, the hill tests conducted on various
roadway showed no signs of significant radar response due to the hill itself. The effect the hills did have
on the radar sensor were all related to loss of track on target vehicles as they departed from the radar's
field-of-view due to passing over a hill in the roadway. Again, the hills themselves did not induce any
response in the radar.
G.1.4 Traffic Tests

The traffic tests conducted under this program were aimed at qualitatively evaluating the open
roadway environment. On the open roadway, a forward looking radar is exposed to numerous types of
objects with diverse dynamic characteristics. The object-rich environment in which the radar must
operate consists of other moving vehicles and roadside "stuff'. We have categorized this "stuff' as
background objects. These background objects include bridge overpasses, signs, guard rails, and so
forth. The response to these background types of objects has been discussed previously. This section
will focus on qualitatively examining the returns from other moving vehicles. The following three areas
will be addressed in this section:
• Complexity of Road Environment
• On-coming Traffic Characteristics
• "Non-standard" Vehicles
G.1.5 Complexity of Roadway Environment

To evaluate the FLAR response to other moving vehicles, a number of collections were made in
various traffic densities. While higher traffic densities would seem to constitute a much more difficult
environment for the FLAR, it is important to remember that the sensor's field of view limits the number
of targets which generate returns to the radar. Figure G-10 illustrates how the radar's FOV limits the
number of objects which can be tracked. The lightly shaped target in the left lane of Figure G-10 will not
cause a return to be induced in the radar. This indicates that the traffic density present outside of the
radar's FOV has little effect on its performance.
~
~ Radar Beam l) ,0:,j Detected Object
D Beam Shadow
Figure G-10. FOV and Occlusion Limitations
Another factor related to the FLAR' s performance in various levels of traffic density is occlusion of
the radar energy. Referring to Figure G-10, one can see that the object within the host vehicle's lane and
furthest in range does not induce a return to the radar because the radar energy has been occluded
(blocked) by another object. (It is important to note that under certain geometries and roadway
G-8
configurations that the FLAR can actually see vehicles beyond a preceding vehicle due to multipath
effects of the radar energy under the preceding vehicle.)
These two factors, sensor FOV and energy occlusion, result in the FLAR performance being less
sensitive to traffic density than one might intuitively expect. The largest impact of traffic density on the
FLAR performance is related to the dynamic movements between the FLAR host-vehicle and
surrounding vehicles.
Figure G-l 1 illustrates the FLAR performance in a heavy traffic scenario. The text along the left
side of Figure G-l 1 describes the various vehicle movements and locations along the collection timeline.
Two general observations, both fairly intuitive, were made during the roadway tests with varying traffic
densities:
1. As traffic density increased from light (2 to 3 cars within 100 meter stretch of road) to moderate,
significantly less of the background returns were observed in the radar output. The returns which
were observed were almost always from another moving vehicle.
2. As traffic density increased from moderate to heavy, similar types of returns were observed but
at increasingly nearer ranges.
Open Roadway Tests - US 23 N. Med Traffic - 970303J

Flar in left lane - :OS IIDI
Flar mows toward left
lane (car in frant) -:18:01 Ill
:578D
Flar mnght lane, car begins 700
8llllmglhefr-v - :SO
Flar mows to~ lane ·:47 -.;- IDl
(earls belind 1111:k mIt lane)i
MmiYan in left lane - :40 : !ill
.!!
Flar ID left Jane, Minlvani l_ GI
be~/='~~~"32 311
to left lane 'Z1 JI)
100
Mmivan II lront of F1ar

car on left
Figure G-l 1. Collection in Heavy Traffic
The first observation may actually result in the moderate traffic density scenario being easier for the
threat assessment algorithm to handle than the light traffic scenario. This is due to the fact that many of
the “extraneous” returns from background objects, which have high motion dynamics relative to the host
vehicle, are not evident in the raw radar returns. There are reasons the background returns are no longer
observable in the raw radar data. The first reason is that the increased number of vehicles are occluding
the background objects. The second reason is that the returns from the vehicles (i.e., their RCS) is
generally higher than that of the background objects. The automatic gain control of the FLAR is
adjusted to avoid saturation from the vehicle returns, thereby reducing the sensitivity of the FLAR
receiver. Therefore, the relatively weaker returns from the background objects are no longer observable.
The second observation indicates that under heavy traffic scenarios, the threat assessment algorithm
has much less time to warn the operator of a potential impending crash. In addition to having less time,
the algorithm may also have much less data. Due to the rapid detection and loss of track on the
surrounding vehicles due to dynamic movements (see Figure G-l l), the threat assessment algorithm may
end-up with significantly less of a time-location profile (i.e., track) of an object under heavy traffic
conditions.
G-9
In conclusion, qualitatively speaking from a pure sensor perspective, traffic density does not have as
much of an effect on sensor performance as one may intuitively expect. Field-of-view and occlusion
effects play significant roles in limiting the number of returns to the radar sensor regardless of traffic
density. It is important to note that their are secondary effects of higher traffic density such as multipath
which can induce returns in the sensor. From a collision avoidance or ACC application perspective, the
biggest impact traffic density has is related to the average time a threat assessment algorithm has to react
to a particular scenario. By definition, the spacing between vehicles in high density traffic is lower and
therefore reaction times are decreased.
G.1.6 Oncoming Traffic Characteristics

Several data collections were made while on a a-lane, non-divided highway on which oncoming
traffic was present. The raw radar data plot in Figure G-12 summarizes how the returns from oncoming
traffic manifests itself with respect to the radar sensor. The specific returns from the oncoming traffic
are annotated in the figure. These returns are very transient in nature and while there are clearly evident
above the sensor’s noise floor, they are relatively low (on the order of -10 to -2 dBsm) when compared to
typical returns from a preceding vehicle located in the host vehicle’s lane.
The reason for the lower return levels is that the orientation between the radar and the oncoming
vehicle is such that the vehicle is located at the edge of the radar antenna pattern. This data was
collected on a straight roadway and the results are similar to those for the test track experiments
conducted with a vehicle located at the side of the roadway.
This traffic scenario may cause large problems for an automotive radar designed for collision
warning/avoidance. The problem is that the vehicle has a high closing rate and appears to be located
within the host vehicle’s lane. The high closing rate is evident in Figure G-12 by the wide almost
horizontal return lines from the oncoming traffic. Also evident in the figure is that the oncoming vehicle
exits the sensor’s field of view at around 40 meters. Note that the FLAR’s FOV for these tests was based
on a 3dB beamwidth of 3 degrees. At 40 meters, an object closing at 100 MPH (assuming 50 MPH for
each vehicle) has less than 1 second to impact.
The parameters of the threat assessment and warning algorithms must be set such that the false
alarms from oncoming traffic is minimized. In the case of on-coming traffic on a straight-away, this
would mean that the warning time would have to be set to less than 1 second, or the processing
algorithms may chose to ignore oncoming traffic based on the relative speeds of the objects. Obviously
ignoring objects which are approaching the host vehicle at speeds greater than its own ground speed
would minimize false alarms, but would also have an impact on the number of crashes the system would
be effective in mitigating.
Figure G-12. Returns From On-Coming Traffic
G-10
G.1.7 Non-Standard Vehicles
Another issue regarding the data collected on the open roadway is related to the variety of vehicles
on may encounter. These types of vehicles range from small sports cars, to large tractor trailers, to
towed home-made wood trailers, to towed fiberglass boats, and so on. The point is that one encounters a
large number of “non-standard” vehicles on the roadway.
Figure G-13 shows the FLAR radar returns resulting from following an empty automobile carrier
vehicle. This vehicle is irregularly shaped and constructed primarily from metal. The plot in
Figure G-13 shows how the return signature from the single vehicle is range dependent. At near ranges,
there appears to be individual scattering centers located at the rear of the vehicle along with another set
of scatterers towards the front of the vehicle. This second set of scatterers is located somewhere within
the carrier trailer. As the range to the vehicle increases, the return from the vehicle changes in that the
returns from the second set of scatterers fades away and the individual scattering centers from the rear of
the vehicle blend together.
This empirical data does not indicate that the car carrier would cause any particular problems to the
FLAR in terms of detection and tracking of the vehicle. However, if a FLAR implementation and
processing begins to rely on particular vehicle signatures for classification or performs some sort of
centroid processing to locate and track targets, these “non-standard” returns from the carrier vehicle may
pose problems.
OpenRoadwayTests-CarCarrier-970303K
2200
1600
Carrier begins to change
to left lane, flar changes 25 1400
with carrier
1200
:32:05 1000
en
Car Carrier in front of Flar :45 600
Figure G-l 3. Returns From Car Carrier Vehicle
..
G-11
OPEN ROADWAY DATA PLOTS
The following pages are selected raw data plots generated from the Open Roadway collections.
These plots were selected to provide a reasonably sample of the type of data collected on the open road.
Each plot is labeled with the appropriate test identification and annotation on the plots is provided where
appropriate along with a description of the roadway environment. The reader is referred to the test
results descriptions in Appendix G.
These plots are provided to assist developers in quantitatively assessing the radar response to the
scenarios tested. Of course these results are specific to the TRW FLAR sensor configuration
(e.g. antenna gain and beam shape). The reader is referred to Section 4 of the final report which
discusses the FLAR sensor characteristics in order to extrapolate the results to other configurations.
G-12
960620 - Overpass Roadway Tests
9Em20AA:lcads0to620 Overpass Roadway Te sis• 960020A
016
0.14
02~•· . ·
0.12
. ·.
0.1 >015
g .·:···
:l
lo.oo ~ 01
io.oo J 005~.....atl'!I"'
. .:•'••.
0.04
0
0 IIXl
200 400 8X) 8XI 100> 1200 l&l 0 Pulses (rime)

lmge Dislance (melers)
I Overpass
I Odegree offset
Orarpass Roadway Tesls -960020A
700r .................................. _. .......... _. .....................................
.. .
...
.
. . .. ..
.
..
.
..
Corner Reflector Car cuts In lane - :46 600
Overpass out of view - :29 DJ

Corner out of view - :28
:26 200
Van Truck followed by •· :20:16 o

Car, both ahead of Van 0
~fmxds0lo200 Oierpass Roamy Tests •m211B
016
0.14 ·:·
02
0.12
5'015
I ,, •t,
0.1 E
I I
···:,
lo.oo :t. 01
E
:J
jooo : 0.05
004 0
0 :m
200 400 000 000 100:, 1200 100 0 Pulses (f1me)

Rr,ge Distance (meters)
I Overpass
I 0 degree offset
Oierpass Roamy Tesls •m211B
;32 lllr··········:······----·.···········.·······
Corner Reflector 250
:27 200
-;-
E
~100
Overpass out of view •• :24 :
Corner out of view - :23 d'.
:22 100
" ro
Van Car in front of Van •· :28:17 o

0 20 ~ ro oo ~ rn ~
Distance (meters)
900l20C Re00lds Oto 300 Overpass Roadway Tests. 960020C
0.06
··:··
0.06
·-:.
0.04
·:·
. ·· ...:,
{ow :•.
i
Q.._.
0 400
200 400 600 600 100) 1200 100 0 Pulses (Time)

fqe Distance (meters)

1 degree offset
Overpass Roadway Tesls • 960020C
400r .................................................................................... .
. . . . . . .
Overpass 350
Corner Reflector
:33:m
overpass out of view •• :32
Corner out of view •• :31
.,
=2511
E
E.
:28 ., 200
""'
:j
n. 100
...
Van Car In front of Van -

96002(X)Alco!ds0to200 Overpass Roaitway Tesls • !Rti20D
0.06
o.re.
000
0.04~ I
'•!
looo ' ,,
j ·•:
0.00
. ~.1,ll I. '•!
~·~ ·en,; IPA:i'P ~ :m
200 400 00) OOJ 100:l 1200 150 0 Pulses (rime)

f\W1g8 DiSlance (melers)
I Overpass
I 1 degree offset
Overpass Roaltttlay Tests •!Rti20D
lXlr··········:·········· .···········.········--------
overpass out ofvlew- :41:01 200

-;;- 'I
Corner out of view •• :59[

., 100
Car In center of •• :58 :
Van's lane &
:56100
ro
Car on left begins •• :53
to change lanes
Van Car In front of Van .. :40:51 o
0 20 Ml 00 00 100 120 140
D1slance (melers)
Overpass Roadway Tests• 000020E
960820E Reoortl9 010480
008 •,,,
.. -:·
0.00
0.04 '··
...:·- .
!o.m .....~ .. ··•,
.,
I
011!
0
0 &XI
l!ll 0 Pulses (rime)

2()1) 400 llOO 800 1000 1200
Distance (meters)
~
I Overpass
I 2 degree offset
Overpass Roadway Tests• mllE
!iOOr ....... :..................... ·: ...... ·:........ ...: .. .
. . .
Corner Reflector :36 400
::61
·31 -;-:m
Overpass out of view •· :30 !;
Corner out of scene •• :29 ~ 250
"
:26 ~" 200
100
:21100
00
Car In front of Van •· :16 o

Van 0 JI ffl ro oo ~ m ~
Distance (meters)
900l2(F Aeoord!I Olo 340 Olerpass Roatlilay Tesls •OOlfilOF
000
005
0.04
~O.(X3
j
0(2
400
200 400 eoo eoo 1(00 1200 100 0 Pulses (f1me)

Rlng8 Distance (meters)
I · Overpass
I 2 degree file
Omrpass Roait«ay Tests• !ID320F
350r·· ··· ···. ············· ······· .............................................. .
Corner Reflector
2ro
overpass out of scene •· :07
Corner out of scene •· :06 ~
:os E21D
E,
Minivan In center •·
of lane
:54:00100
Minivan begins to cul·· :59
In front of Van
Van l) ,10 ro 00 100 Ill 140

Distance (meters)
90C620G Flilca'cB Olo 300 Olerpass Roalt#ay Tests• 960020G
0.06
·~·
0.00
000
·•.: .. :··
,
005 ,.
0.04
5'
g0.04 •,:
.,"'
fom ~003
:·•.
j E
iJ002
Ir
o.ce 001
o.._.
a 400
200 400 600 600 100) 1200 100 0 Pulses (rime)

~ Distance (meters)
10:01:18- Begin File
I · Overpass
3 degree offset
350
..
Olerpass Roalt#ay Tests • 960020G
...
400r····· ···•. ···········. ··········:··········.
. .·········· ..········· ·:··········.
.. . .. .
..
Corner Reflector
:33 Ill
overpass out of scene •• :32
Corner out of scene •• :31
-200
"
E
E.
:28 .,DJ
:i
""
o. 100
:23100
00
Van :18 0
0 20 -411 60 00 100 120 1-411
Distance (meters)
~ Aecon:11010300 Overpass Roait.vay Tests • 000020H
0.06
Oai
005
O!»
~004
'ti'
!ow Jo03
E
j j002
0::
Oil! 0.01
200 «xi 6Xl 000 11XX) 1200 100 0 Pulses (rime)

fmge Distance (meters)
I Overpass
I 3 degree offset
Overpase Roait.vay Tests -000020H
Corner Reflector Overpass out of view •· :21

:20:m
Corner out of view - :19
.,
. :10100
ro
Van :050
0 20 ffl ro oo ~ m ~
Distance (meters)
900l20I Aecads Oto3:Xl Overpass Roadway Tests • m201
012
.....
0.1
... •·· -:•. :.
012 •,•,,
.-:· ··-:-.
01 .,
0.00 .i• .' ,, ,.
: ···...
.-~ .... '!
~0.00
••,;
I
o.oi ..
0.(2
DI
,,
200 400 ---

IKX)
fB9I
IKX) 100) 1200
Distance (meters)
100 0 Pulses (Time)
I Overpass
I 5 degree offset
Overpass Roadway Tests• m201
Corner Reflector
Overpass out of scene •· :29 :m

Corner out of scene •· :28 'ii'
E
~100
m
"
'3
D.
Van 20 40 00 00 100 120 140

Distance (meters)
!IEn0).J Aecam Oto 300 Overpass Roadway Tests. !mi20.J
000
OJJT
000
000
. '.··.
,,
5'000
oa; g
"'
"'~004 '•,
{001
E
:! :••,
jo.m &:002
o.ai o. . J
0 400
0.01
200 400 000 Im 100> 1200 t!ill 0 Pulses (Time)

Pa,ga Distance (meters)
I Overpass
I 5 degree offset
:46 3'.0
.
Overpass Roadway Tests• !mi20.I
350r·· .. ·· .... :........... ,. .......... _. ...................... ,. .......... :........... .
' .
Corner Reflector
2£,0
'ii'
Overpass out of scene - :41 E 200 'I
Corner out of scene •• :40 E.
"'
0)
'S 1!i0
n.
:36100
!O
:31 0
Van 0 20 40 ro oo 100 120 \40
Distance (meters)
Overpass RoaitNay Tosls •m20K
9lm1ll< Aeoon:tl 010280
0.35
·· ........
:• .
0.3
04-
.;·· ·• .. :
'•, ..
0.25
5'0.3 .--~ ,.• ··:·••,.. . '••··i
.s ,,,•' : ... :~-.
0.2 1l .. •·· : '•• ...
~02 ·:•, ·:
1 E .: ···· .. :•.
Jo.15 i 0.1
ir ··•!
0.1
0
0 :m
0.05
150 0 Pulses(fimo)
200 400 9JO 9JO 100) 1200
Dislance (melers)
lmga
I Overpass
I 8 degree offset
overpass out of view •• :23

Overpass RoaitNay Tesls •m20K
Corner out of view •·
:16100
50
Van :11 00
20 40 60 00 100 120 140
D1s1ance (melers)
9lm20(. Aeccrdl 010440 O;erpass Roadway Tests • !mi20L
0.14
0.12
I
02
OJ Ill 5'015
. '.··
g
000
i> 01 I .·:·
h
l E :.
)ooo :,
~0.05
004
0
0 !iOO
I -lib I
om
200 400 600 600 100) 1200 100 0 Pulses (Time)

Fmge Distance (meters)
10:28:33- Begin File
Overpass
I 8 degree offset
Oierpass Roadway Tests •!mi20L
Corner Reflector
Overpass out of view •· :47 f 200

'I
Corner out of view -· :46 E.

:43.!!":, 200
Q.
:38100
ro
Van :33 O
0 20 40 60 00 100 120 140
Distance (meters)
900l2™ ReooltB Oto ax> Overpass Roadway Tests• 98li20M
025 •·:·
,,, .........
!·•
'•:
02 025 •' ....
i •' '•;.
02 :··· . I
0.15 ,,:•·· ···.:..

,.,1015 .. ,· . ··· ... :
I ~
e 01
, !··.
J 0.1 i
Q:005
·······•:.
0
O.C6 0 DI
0 ,_,.......,.....
0 200 400 800 eoo 1000 1200 100 D Pulses (rime)
Rlnge Distance (meters)
Overpass
I 8 degree offset
* no comer present
:20Dl
Overpass Roadway Tests• 98li20M

Overpass out of view·· :17
car cuts In
:15 200
~
E
~100
.,
3l
~
:10100
00
Van 20 ~ m oo ~ m ~
Distance (meters)
970301 - Roadway Backgrounds
!171B'.11D Aecam Oto 720 Roa<hvay Backgrounds• 970JJ!D
0(11
000
0.00 '•:.
'!•,
000
s;-Dffi '·~
g ··•
OOI "'
~
"'~004 ~-. '(
E
Jo.oo ::,
~002
0
0 !IX)
O.o1
200 400 ID) ID) 100'.l 1200 1ro o Pulses (lime)

Rrol Distance (meters)
Roa<hvay Backgrounds • 970JJ1 D

.' .. ····..
lnlr· ·· ·· :········ ······· ................................................
.'
700
:03:0400)
-;,!ill)
E
E.
:54 "'400
.,"
3
o.;ll)
:44t'Cll
'lo
100
....34 O0
3) 40 60 00 100 131 140
Distance (meters)
970301 - Roadway Backgrounds
971Dl1E Fmxtls Oto 720 Roadway Backgrounds - 970ll1E
007 .
...
,
000
om ·•!, •
004
...:·• ...
i ·i
Jo.w '••,
'•,.:
llXI
200 400 8Xl 800 100) 1200 100 0 Pulses (f1me)

Rr9I Distance (melers)
Roadway Backgrounds -970ll1 E

llXlr···-· ···· :· ··· ····. · -···········-······-·- ·-·······-·-························
.
0 o I I I •
.
o
• I
"
~ ~ oo oo ~ rn ~
D1slance (melers)
970303 - Open Roadway Tests
971DXlAA3colds0to540 Open Roadway Tests. Hill Tum with Guardrail• 970ll3A
0.12
01
012
:·•·
01 'l.
000
5'
10.00
i 000 ····;.
fo.oo :·
E
i :! 004
~
004
0
0 WI
200 400 000 000 100> 1200 100 0 Pulses (Time)

Renge Distance (meters)
Hill & Turn with Guardrail 19:22:45 - Begin File

Two lane highway
Center Beam Open Roadway Tes1s • Hill Tum with Guardrail- 970ll3A
OOJ r ······················oii"co-m-loo-:-.-=-rra-tt·"1c.- •---•N•-•·•··-···••-·•·•·
·06
Truck & Cars exit [:2a:05 400
scene •• ~
Cars & Van enter :02 ~
ene behind truck -- :23:01 E. :m
in entering curve (left) :59 :l
I !!!.
Truck enters scene ~
(oncoming) :55 ,'(XI
100
140
970:mB Aecords Oto400 Open Roamvay Tests - Straignl Hill- 970JJ3B
O.f17
...····.· ..
, .. ~-.
···:
000
000
·· ... ;.
'•••.
o.a; ··· ..
••,,:
5'0.lli :~- ... ·• ..
I
0.04
t
io04
E
Jo.en ~
o: 0.02
-~ 0.01
o~ta1i11L
0
0 000
0 200 «)() 000 000 1000 1200 150 0 Pulses (Time)

Fmge D1slance (meters)
Straight Hill I 19:43:43 • Begin File

Two Lane Highway
Center Beam Open Roamvay Tests• Stra1gnt Hill• 970JJ3B
500
450
Oncoming car - :44:03 400

enters scene
Flar at top of hill - :59 300
'il'DI
Oncoming car E
out of scene •· :56 ~ 250
Oncoming car .;!
In scene - :53 ~ 200
Start uphill •· :51 150
100
50
·430
• D ll ffl m oo ~ m ~
Distance (melers)
9703l3C Alcooil 700 to 1240 Open Roa!M'ay Tests • Yellow krow Signs • 970ll3C
0.00
000
01
0.CTT
000
0.00
~o.a;
iooo
.,
~ :•
jooi E 004
::,
i '•:·
n:
002~-
0.00
Q.._.
D!I! lldlal. 0 1400
D.O
,.......... 100 Im
200 400 000 000 10CO 1200 Pulses (Time)
Yellow Arrow Signs on Curve I 19~59:27 - Begin File

Two Lane Highway
Center Beam Open Roa!M'ay Tests• Yellow krow Signs • 970ll3C
Pass oncoming car - :27 1200

1100
Exiting Curve, top •- :23
1100
of hill, oncoming car 11,:.
i'1000 '
1
........ :'
t
:11., 1000 I
I
:
~ 900
11
Entering Lefthand •• :13
Curve, uphill (Yellow Signs) 900 . ■,~,
Pass oncoming car - :09 8!iO
20:00:07 00J 111 •!
Pass car on right •· :06

Oncoming Car 700 40 60 00 100 120 140
0 20
Distance (meters)
970303 • Open Roadway Tests
gfaJrF Alc0ltls 16010 700 Open Roadway Tesls - SCulY8s -970ll3F
0.45
···:··
0.4
•' .... !•,
•·,.
0.35 05
0.3 04 ·• ...
!·.
1•• ··:.: ...
i025 Io3
. .. 'I; ,!•''
'• .
······· ... ... •,;
~
~
~
j 0.2 E
:,
li
02 :···-...
···~· ..
0.15 o: 0.1 . .;
0
0 IUI
200 «xi 600 800 1000 1200 100 0 Pulses (Time)

Fmge O1slance (meters)
SCurves 20:28:31 - Begin File

Two Lane Highway
Center Beam Open Roadway Tests - SCu1Y0s -970ll3F
llllr· .. ···· ......................... · ..............................................
.. .' .. .. .. ..
ExltingCuive
:29:019ll ...........
nterlng rlghthand cuive :00
Passing oncoming cars ~58 ~
Oncoming Car out of· :56 r,ooe I
viewhexttln11 turn E.
vncomlng cars •• :52 gi
:51 ,; 400
Entering Lefthand •• :50 a.
Cuive
:41200
Heading to S Curve •· :39
Oncoming Car
Guardrail rn front of Van 1000 20 40 60 00 100 120 140
Turning left Distance (meters)
97onlH Aeoords 010900 Open Roailway Tests -Oncoming Traffic - 970lJ3H
005
0.05
000
0.05 'i,
''
O.OI
5'
g_0.04
~
looo ~003 .: ,;
E
I ~002
n:
0.02 0.01
o....
0 101)
0.01
oL--'---..____;.;...:.==.::.:..:.c:::::;:!!!-L_---! 1fll 0
0 200 400 fDJ fDJ 1<XX> 1200 Pulses (Time)
Oncoming Traffic I 20:58:38 • Begin File

Two Lane Highway
Left Beam
Flar passes
oncoming traffic ••
l 101l
001
:18 !lll
Flar on top of hill - :14
700
Oncoming car ahead
:59:0B'i' ro:J
Flar passes oncoming [ :06 [
Traffic •· :03 ., 500
incoming Traffic ahead •:00 m
:58 ~ 400
Dl
:48 200
' 45
Flar passes oncoming [ : 100
Traffic ••
:40
Oncoming Minivan & cars• :38 o
0
Distance (meters)
ll700CXll Aeoolttl Olo 91D Open Roadway Tesls -US 23 N, Med. Traffic - 970ll3J
04 ,••:···
0.36
:... :~ ···~
,•i•
.
:,.,
04, · ,,' :
0.3
''
'!•··
~03J. · · ':
0.25
g ·•: ...
I 02 jo2j·•" ·r
E
0
.
1015 :o., ' ' · )·
:, '
··-.,
.,.
0.1 0
0 l(Jll
200 400 00) 00) 10'.Xl 1200 100 D Pulses (Time)

fmge Distance (melers)
US 23 North - Medium Traffic 21:17:17-Begin File

Divided Freeway
Center Beam Open Roadway Tests - US 23 N, Med Traffic -971m3J
Rar In left lane •· :05 l!XIJ f' · · .. :
Flar moves toward left !UJ
lane (car In front) •· :18:01
:57 IID
Flar In right lane, car begins
700
exiting the freeway •• :50
Flar moves to right lane• :47 ...,. ml
I(car Is behind truck In rt lane) {
Minivan In left lane •• :40 : 500
·37 "
'S 400
Flar In left lane, Minivan :36 n.
bealns to move In behind car 300
"'Flar begins moving - :32
to left lane :
" 27 200
100
Minivan In front of Flar

car on left
97mJKA!oolds8))to2100 Open Roadway Tests • Car Carrier• 970ll3K
05
045 ·! ·
0.4 05
..
'••
036 04
03 r.
'ii'03 ·· ..
'•'
'•
lo25 ~ ·-
E02
i 0.2
;
![ 01 I •'
015
0
0.1 0 2600
400 8)) 8)) 1000 1200 150 500 Pulses (Time)

200
All,ge Distance (meters)
Car Carrier 21 :31 :15 • Begin File

Divided Freeway
Center Beam Open Roadway Tesls • Car Callier• 970ll3K
... --
2200r .................................................................................. .
..
20ll
:4511m
~trm
arrler begins to change -:26!
:o left lane, liar changes :25,. 1400
ith carrier i ... ,:
11.1200
:32:05 10ll
!ID
Car Carrier In front of Flar - :45 ro:i

0
971ml. Aeca'dl Oto8l0 Open Roadway Tests -275 N, Muhilane, Heavy Traffic -970JJ3L
0.5
·:·
0.45 .,
. ·:•
04
05
~
.
'•'
•' ·••,
0.35
04
5," I
03
[025 '! 111 .fo3

~
'• ...,.,.
. ..•
•!
I !{ ··r1 E 02
j 0.2 .:.: I ·1·I II,,
I i
..
0.15 I iIi; :i:, n: 01 , .;
0.1 I 1' ID)
D.lli /,'
11, ' '
o~ - - - - - --
o 200 400 8)0 8)0 1000 1200 1&1 0 Pulses (f1me)
Al'Q9 Distance (meters)
275 N, Multilane, Heavy Traffic I 21 :36:25 - Begin File

Divided Freeway
Center Beam Open Roadway Tests• 275 N, Muftilane, Heavy Traffic• 970JJ3L
00)
Flar begins to move to - :02

left lane 700
:55 f.00
Car enters scene on left - :53
,,.,:
:,
Car In center of lane •• :35 200

car enters scene on left
Car moves to Flar's lane • :31 100
Car enters scene on left •· :27
Merging traffic ahead •· :25 o
on right 0 20 ffl oo oo ~ m ~
Distance (meters)

Dot 2665 DS1

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

Dot 2665 DS1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

654 100-9-F

CHARACTERIZATION AND EVALUATION OF A PROTOTYPE

Contract Number: DTNH22-94-Y-17016

R.K. Gilbert, P.K. Zoratti, R. Becker, G. Brumbaugh, T. Chaplin, M. Harrison,

Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (ERIM) 654100-9-F

!3. SPONSORlNG/MONlTORlNG AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY

12a. DlSTRlBUTlON/AVAlLABlLlTY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 2 0 0 words)

14. SUBJECT ITEMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

1.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF VEHICLES AND ROADWAY OBJECTS

1.2 ROADWAY TESTS

1.3 TESTING, EVALUATION AND CERTIFYING METHODOLOGIES

1.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS AND SUGGESTED FUTURE EFFORTS

2.1 TRW FORWARD-LOOKING AUTOMOTIVE RADAR (FLAR)

2.2 MATERIALS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

2.4 ROADWAY TESTS

l 180 lb. person

3.3 RADAR MEASUREMENTS

3.3.1 Experimental Setup

8510 PC Blue cable

Figure 3-l. Data Collection Set-up

3.4 DATA PROCESSING

3.5 DATA OUTPUT PRODUCTS AND INTERPRETATION

Aspect Angle (Deg)

Figure 3-2. Example of Aspect Profile Plot

Figure 3-3. Example of Range Profile Plot

3.5.3 Two-Dimensional Image “Movie”

3.5.4 Two-Dimensional Image-Single Aspect Angle

- 170 Degree Aspect Angle 180 Degree Aspect Angle

Figure 3-4. Examples of Single Aspect Angle Images

3.5.5 Two-Dimensional Image--Integrated from Multiple Aspect Angles

3.6 INITIAL OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Maximum and Minimum RCS Values

Distribution of Scatterers Across Targets

4.2 SENSOR CONFIGURATION

Figure 4-1. TRW's AICC-3B FLAR

4.3 SENSOR OPERATION

4.3.1 General Overview

4.3.2 Timing Specifications

FRAMEN FRAME N+1

• Diagram not to scale All times are approximate.

Figure 4-2. FLAR Transmit Pulse Timing

4.3.3 Automatic Gain Control (AGC) Amplifier

Figure 4-3. AGC Attenuation (dB) Versus Voltage (Volts)

4.3.4 Transmitted Waveform

Figure 4-4. Graphical Representations of a Chirp Waveform

Figure 4-5. Range in Proportion to IF Frequency

Center Frequency 94.165 GHz

4.3.5 Intermediate Frequency Signal

4.3.6 Power Measurements

TRW FLAR TX/RX Beam Patterns TRW B,AR IX Beam P/ltterns

Figure 4-6. FLAR Beam Patterns

4.3.7 Antenna Beam Patterns

4.3.8 Beam Switch Isolation

4.4 BASELINE PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS

4.4.1 Radar Field-of-View

rotary platform measurements are shown in

Knowledge of these beam patterns is essential in ---· -

located in the mainlobe of the left antenna. IOdB/D1v

Taking this issue a step further, a large target

Several of the roadway tests in this program are

4.4.2 Range Accuracy Figure 4-7. FLAR Beam Patterns

The range tests are a set of static tests designed to

-50 .____ _..___ _,___ _,;. .