remote sensing

Article
Performance and Requirements of GEO SAR Systems
in the Presence of Radio Frequency Interferences
Yuanhao Li 1,2, * ID
, Andrea Monti Guarnieri 2 ID
, Cheng Hu 1,3 and Fabio Rocca 2
1 School of Information and Electronics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China;
cchchb@163.com
2 Dipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano,
Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy; andrea.montiguarnieri@polimi.it (A.M.G.);
fabio.rocca@polimi.it (F.R.)
3 Key Laboratory of Electronic and Information Technology in Satellite Navigation (Beijing Institute of Technology),
Ministry of Education, Beijing 100081, China
* Correspondence: lyh.900101@163.com; Tel.: +86-10-6891-8127

Received: 27 September 2017; Accepted: 3 January 2018; Published: 9 January 2018

Abstract: Geosynchronous Synthetic Aperture Radar (GEO SAR) is a possible next generation
SAR system, which has the excellent performance of less than one-day revisit and hundreds of
kilometres coverage. However, Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) is a serious problem, because the
specified primary allocation frequencies are shared by the increasing number of microwave devices.
More seriously, as the high orbit of GEO SAR makes the system have a very large imaging swath,
the RFI signals all over the illuminated continent will interfere and deteriorate the GEO SAR signal.
Aimed at the RFI impact in GEO SAR case, this paper focuses on the performance evaluation and
the system design requirement of GEO SAR in the presence of RFI impact. Under the RFI impact,
Signal-to-Interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR) and the required power are theoretically deduced both
for the ground RFI and the bistatic scattering RFI cases. Based on the theoretical analysis, performance
evaluations of the GEO SAR design examples in the presence of RFI are conducted. The results
show that higher RFI intensity and lower working frequency will make the GEO SAR have a higher
power requirement for compensating the RFI impact. Moreover, specular RFI bistatic scattering will
give rise to the extremely serious impact on GEO SAR, which needs incredible power requirements
for compensations. At last, real RFI signal behaviours and statistical analyses based on the SMOS
satellite, Beidou-2 navigation satellite and Sentinel-1 A data have been given in the appendix.

Keywords: Geosynchronous SAR (GEO SAR); Radio Frequency Interference (RFI); Signal-to-Interference
and Noise Ratio (SINR); RFI measurement

1. Introduction
L band, C band and X band spaceborne microwave systems play important roles in lots of remote
sensing applications, such as the surface deformation measurements of landslides and earthquakes
and vegetation mapping of forests. Nevertheless, the available microwave frequencies allocated for
the spaceborne systems, called the active primary allocation frequencies, are given by the International
Telecommunications Union’s (ITU’s) Earth Exploration-Satellite Service (EESS) [1]. Active primary
allocations within the microwave frequency extension from L band to X band are provided in Table 1 [1].
Beyond the primary allocation frequencies in different radio frequency bands, there are protected
frequency bands or void frequency bands. Taking a classical protected frequency band in L band as
an example, the frequency interval 1400–1427 MHz is protected, within which unwanted emissions
of active service operations are forbidden and even the emissions from the nearby bands should be
guaranteed to be lower than an expected value [2].

Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82; doi:10.3390/rs10010082 www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing

 Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 2 of 23

Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 2 of 23

Table 1. Active EESS primary allocations in L, C and X bands.
Table 1. Active EESS primary allocations in L, C and X bands.

Band Band Frequency

Frequency Range
Range (MHz)
(MHz) Services
Services inin
Band
Band
L L 1215–1300
1215–1300 Radio Navigation Satellite System (RNSS)
Radio Navigation Satellite System (RNSS) andand
radiolocation
radiolocation
C 5250–5570 Aeronautical RNSS and radiolocation
C 5250–5570 Aeronautical RNSS and radiolocation
X 9300–9900 Radiolocation and radio navigation
X 9300–9900 Radiolocation and radio navigation

However,asasmore
However, moreand andmoremore microwave
microwavedevicesdevicesare are implemented,
implemented,the theprimary
primaryallocation
allocation
frequenciesare
frequencies arebecoming
becomingincreasingly
increasinglycrowded.crowded.Different
Differentsystems,
systems,whichwhichutilize
utilizethethesame
sameororadjacent
adjacent
microwave frequency bands, will interfere with each other. Since only
microwave frequency bands, will interfere with each other. Since only the active primary allocation the active primary allocation
frequenciescan
frequencies canbe beused
usedby bythe thespaceborne
spacebornemicrowave
microwavesystems,systems,the thesystems
systemscannot cannotavoid avoidbeing
being
impactedby
impacted bythe
theRadio
Radio Frequency
Frequency Interference
Interference (RFI).
(RFI).Based
Basedon onLLband
bandAquarius
Aquarius scatterometers
scatterometers and
andthe
SMOS radiometer, strong RFI emissions, which might come from
the SMOS radiometer, strong RFI emissions, which might come from the terrestrial sources (e.g.,the terrestrial sources (e.g., military
radars),radars),
military have been havedetected [2–4]. [2–4].
been detected Besides those those
Besides detected by the
detected byradiometers,
the radiometers, in 2016, Pascual
in 2016, et al.
Pascual
discussed the crosstalk RFI in the interferometric Global Navigation
et al. discussed the crosstalk RFI in the interferometric Global Navigation Satellite System Satellite System Reflectometry
(iGNSS-R), when
Reflectometry the Delay-Doppler
(iGNSS-R), Map of the desired
when the Delay-Doppler Map ofsatellite
the desiredis overlapped by other satellites
satellite is overlapped by other[5].
Other detailed
satellites [5]. Other discussions about the classification
detailed discussions of RFI sources,
about the classification of RFI impacts
sources, analysis
impactsand mitigation
analysis and
methods in the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) system case
mitigation methods in the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) system case were given in [6]. were given in [6].
RFIisisa acommon
RFI commonand andserious
seriousproblem
problemininSynthetic
SyntheticAperture
ApertureRadar Radar(SAR)(SAR)asaswell.well.RFIRFIdecreases
decreases
theSAR
the SARimage
imagequality
qualityby bygenerating
generatingthe thenoise-like
noise-likeartefacts,
artefacts,which
whichisisshown
shownininFigureFigure1.1.RFI RFIcancanalso
also
cause the saturation of the SAR echo and even produce spurious targets
cause the saturation of the SAR echo and even produce spurious targets in the images [7]. Lots of RFIin the images [7]. Lots of RFI has
been
has detected
been detected by SAR
by SARsystems
systemsof different working
of different bands.bands.
working With respect to the Lto
With respect band
the SAR,
L band theSAR,
impacttheof
RFI has been observed in ALOS-1 PALSAR data, which showed
impact of RFI has been observed in ALOS-1 PALSAR data, which showed that RFI could not only that RFI could not only cause haze-like
imagehaze-like
cause artefacts,image
linear pattern
artefacts, or linear
blurs inpattern
the focused SARinimage
or blurs but reduce
the focused SAR theimage
capability of obtaining
but reduce the
polarimetric
capability signatures
of obtaining and the phase
polarimetric accuracies
signatures and oftheSAR
phase images [8]. Likewise,
accuracies of SAR images for C [8].
band systems,
Likewise,
theCRFI
for bandderiving
systems, fromthethe Radio
RFI Local from
deriving Area the
Networks
Radio (RLAN)
Local Area could degrade (RLAN)
Networks the signals of the
could C band
degrade
meteorological radars when the RFI power was comparable to that
the signals of the C band meteorological radars when the RFI power was comparable to that of the of the signal obtaining the nominal
Signal-to-Noise
signal obtainingRatio (SNR) [9,10].
the nominal RFI signals could
Signal-to-Noise Ratiobe (SNR)
observed affecting
[9,10]. RFI asignals
few range linesbe
could in the C band
observed
Sentinel-1A SAR image [11]. Many low power RFI sources with the
affecting a few range lines in the C band Sentinel-1A SAR image [11]. Many low power RFI sources whole bandwidth and a few very
high-power
with the whole temporal RFIs are
bandwidth anddetected
a few very by Sentinel-1A
high-power SAR image as
temporal wellare
RFIs [12]. Significantly,
detected Radarsat-2
by Sentinel-1A
and Sentinel-1A have mutual interferences because they share the same
SAR image as well [12]. Significantly, Radarsat-2 and Sentinel-1A have mutual interferences because working band and have the
they share the same working band and have the almost same equatorial crossing time and multiplein
almost same equatorial crossing time and multiple repeat periods of each other. Although RFI signals
X bandperiods
repeat are not ofas obvious
each other. as those in C band,
Although increased
RFI signals inRFI mitigation
X band are not capability
as obvious is needed
as those dueintoCthe wide
band,
designed bandwidth, as based on the analysis of the C- and X- band
increased RFI mitigation capability is needed due to the wide designed bandwidth, as based on the Windsat microwaves radiometer
data [13,14].
analysis of theMoreover,
C- and X- aband small RFI modulated
Windsat microwaves withradiometer
a pulse wave datahas been Moreover,
[13,14]. observed ina the smallX band
RFI
TerraSAR-Xwith
modulated system, which
a pulse waveif notched
has been out, will giveinrise
observed thetoXsidelobes in the SARsystem,
band TerraSAR-X image [15].which Therefore,
if notched RFI
is an important factor needed to be considered, including the future launched
out, will give rise to sidelobes in the SAR image [15]. Therefore, RFI is an important factor needed to Geosynchronous orbit SAR
(GEO
be SAR) system.
considered, including the future launched Geosynchronous orbit SAR (GEO SAR) system.

Figure
Figure1.1.RFI
RFIininENVISAT
ENVISATimage
imagebefore
beforeremoval
removal(left)
(left)and
andafter
afterremoval
removal(right)
(right)(data
(dataare
arecourtesy
courtesyofof
European Space Agency (ESA)).
European Space Agency (ESA)).

To improve the revisit and the coverage performance of the spaceborne SAR system, GEO SAR
has been proposed [16]. Unlike a totally geostationary communication satellite, GEO SAR satellite
runs in a geosynchronous orbit with non-zero inclination and eccentricity. Thus, a GEO SAR can
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 3 of 23

To improve the revisit and the coverage performance of the spaceborne SAR system, GEO SAR
has been proposed [16]. Unlike a totally geostationary communication satellite, GEO SAR satellite runs
in a geosynchronous orbit with non-zero inclination and eccentricity. Thus, a GEO SAR can obtain
the Remote
relative
Sens.movement
2018, 10, 82 with the targets on the ground, which ensures sufficient Doppler 3bandwidth of 23
after long time integration for realizing two-dimensional SAR imaging. It can achieve a revisit of
the obtain
target the relative
region of onemovement
day and with the targets
a wide beam on the ground,
footprint which
of more thanensures sufficient
hundreds Doppler [17].
of kilometres
bandwidth
According afterinclination,
to the long time integration
the designed for realizing
GEO SAR two-dimensional
systems can be SAR imaging.into
classified It can
theachieve
inclineda orbit
revisit of the target region of one day and a wide beam footprint of more
GEO SAR system (large inclination) and the quasi-geostationary system (small or zero inclination, than hundreds of kilometres
[17]. According to the inclination, the designed GEO SAR systems can be classified into the inclined
small eccentricity but not zero) [18]. To satisfy the SNR requirement, inclined orbit GEO SAR system
orbit GEO SAR system (large inclination) and the quasi-geostationary system (small or zero
needs a higher power and a larger antenna size [19]. It achieves the designed azimuth resolution by
inclination, small eccentricity but not zero) [18]. To satisfy the SNR requirement, inclined orbit GEO
a relative
SAR systemshorterneedsintegration time and
a higher power and it is sensitive
a larger antenna tosize
ionosphere and cluster
[19]. It achieves disturbances
the designed azimuth[20–28].
In contrast, the geostationary system has lower requirements of the
resolution by a relative shorter integration time and it is sensitive to ionosphere and clusterpower and the antenna size [20].
Moreover, it has better revisit and observation performance for the target
disturbances [20–28]. In contrast, the geostationary system has lower requirements of the power and [29]. Nevertheless, it needs
an integration
the antenna size time[20].
of Moreover,
hours. Thus, it hasatmosphere
better revisitdistortion is a serious
and observation problem
performance in target
for the this design
[29]. [30].
GEO Nevertheless,
SAR has a longerit needsintegration
an integration timetime
andof hours.
a larger Thus, atmosphere
coverage distortion
compared withis aa Low
serious problem
Earth Orbit SAR
(LEO SAR). Thus, it has an increased probability to be impacted by the RFI and the relatedaimpact
in this design [30]. GEO SAR has a longer integration time and a larger coverage compared with
willLow Earth severe
be more Orbit SAR (LEO Shown
as well. SAR). Thus, it has an
in Figure increased
2, the probability
high orbit of GEO to be
SARimpacted
gives riseby the
to RFI and swath
a large
the related impact will be more severe as well. Shown in Figure 2, the high orbit of GEO SAR gives
of about 400 km, while the swath of a LEO SAR is only around tens of kilometres in across track.
rise to a large swath of about 400 km, while the swath of a LEO SAR is only around tens of kilometres
Resultantly, more RFI signals will come into the beam of GEO SAR, compared with that in a LEO SAR
in across track. Resultantly, more RFI signals will come into the beam of GEO SAR, compared with
case. Although
that in a LEO theSARRFI case.impact
Althoughdepends
the RFIon its time-frequency
impact characteristics,
depends on its time-frequency such as the bandwidth
characteristics, such
andasthe
thetransmitting
bandwidth and duration, it is general
the transmitting noise-like,
duration, which can
it is general finally which
noise-like, decreasecanthe imaging
finally quality of
decrease
GEO theSAR images
imaging by reducing
quality of GEO SARthe Signal-to-Interference-plus-Noise Ratio (SINR). Therefore,
images by reducing the Signal-to-Interference-plus-Noise Ratiowe need
to consider and evaluate
(SINR). Therefore, the to
we need RFI impactand
consider in the GEOthe
evaluate SAR RFIsystem
impact design.
in the GEO SAR system design.

Figure
Figure 2. Comparisonsbetween
2. Comparisons between thethe GEO
GEOSARSARswath and
swath thethe
and LEO SARSAR
LEO swath and their
swath and covered RFI
their covered RFI
signals (SMOS RFI occurrence probability data in East Asia for 20170902 ± 7 days [31], red regions
signals (SMOS RFI occurrence probability data in East Asia for 20170902 ± 7 days [31], red regions
stand for the high probability of RFI occurrence).
stand for the high probability of RFI occurrence).
The paper is organized as follows. The RFI impact on the SINR and the required average
The paperpower
transmitted is organized as follows.
to compensate TheinRFI
RFI impacts theimpact
GEO SAR oncase
the are
SINR and the
discussed required
in Section average
2. In
Section 3, focusing on the bistatic scattering RFI case, the RFI impact on SINR
transmitted power to compensate RFI impacts in the GEO SAR case are discussed in Section 2. and the required
transmitted
In Section powers on
3, focusing in the
the bistatic
specularscattering
scattering RFI
and case,
non-specular scattering
the RFI impact on cases
SINRare andstudied.
the required
Moreover, under the assumption of the point-like target case, the Doppler filtering effect in the LEO
transmitted powers in the specular scattering and non-specular scattering cases are studied. Moreover,
SAR bistatic scattering RFI case is specially analysed. In Section 4, in the presence of the RFI,
under the assumption of the point-like target case, the Doppler filtering effect in the LEO SAR bistatic
simulations are conducted to analyse the GEO SAR system design requirements in detail. Finally,
scattering RFI case is specially analysed. In Section 4, in the presence of the RFI, simulations are
Section 5 concludes this paper. In addition, some important real RFI measurement results in different
conducted to analyse
frequencies are giventhe
in GEO SAR system design requirements in detail. Finally, Section 5 concludes
the Appendix.
this paper. In addition, some important real RFI measurement results in different frequencies are given
2. Ground
in the AppendixRFI A.
Impacts on GEO SAR Signal
The ground RFI is the most common case which often derives from ground implemented radio
2. Ground RFI Impacts on GEO SAR Signal
electronic devices and ground-based radar systems. Thus, we analyse its impact on GEO SAR in this
section. A sketch
The ground RFIof is
a GEO SAR system
the most commonin the presence
case whichof RFI is
often shown from
derives in Figure 3. Theimplemented
ground received RFI radio
signal will
electronic raise and
devices the noise floor and radar
ground-based degrade the Signal-to-Interference
systems. Thus, we analyseRatio (SIR). on
its impact Generally,
GEO SAR the in this
definition of the SIR is [32].
section. A sketch of a GEO SAR system in the presence of RFI is shown in Figure 3. The received
Ps
SIR = , (1)
PRFI
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 4 of 23

RFI signal will raise the noise floor and degrade the Signal-to-Interference Ratio (SIR). Generally,
the definition of the SIR is [32].
Ps
SIR = , (1)
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82
P RFI 4 of 23
where PRFI is the power of the RFI and Ps is the power of the received effective GEO SAR signal. Based
on the radarPequation
where RFI is the power
[29], Psofcan
the be and Ps asis the power of the received effective GEO SAR signal.
RFIwritten
Based on the radar equation [29], Ps can be written as
2 2
PPaa A
At 2t FF2 (θ(θ , ψ)2L2
d ,dψ ) Llossloss
Ps (Pθs d(,θψ ψ=
d ,) )= σ 0 ρσa0ρρga,ρ g , (2) (2)
πλ 2 R2 4R4
44πλ

where Pa is Pthe
where a isaverage transmitted
the average transmittedpower
powerof of the GEO
GEOSAR SAR At Aist is
signal,
signal, its its antenna
antenna aperture
aperture area, area,
F represents
F represents the gain, θd and
the gain, θ dψ and ψ represent
represent the pointing direction
the pointing of theofantenna,
direction the antenna,Lloss Lislosstheis one-way
the
total one-way
loss, σ0 istotal
the loss, σ 0 is the backscatter coefficient of the target, λ is the wavelength, R is the
backscatter coefficient of the target, λ is the wavelength, R is the slant range and ρ a
and ρslant
g arerange and ρ a and ρ g are azimuth resolution and the ground range resolution, respectively.
azimuth resolution and the ground range resolution, respectively.

At
ψ
ψe
θe θd
R

σ0

Figure 3. Sketch of GEO SAR system in the presence of RFI.

Figure 3. Sketch of GEO SAR system in the presence of RFI.
Considering the thermal noise, we can define the SINR as
Considering the thermal noise, we can define the SINR as
Ps
SINR = , (3)
PRFI +PPsth
SI NR = , (3)
where Pth is the power of the thermal noise, which can+bePth
PRFI written as [32]
Pth =kBTcan
where Pth is the power of the thermal noise, which th Bg ,be written as [32] (4)

where k B =1.38 × 10 −23 J / K is the Boltzmann constant, Tth is the thermal noise temperature and Bg
is the bandwidth of the GEO SAR system. th
P = k B Tth Bg , (4)

where2.1. 10−
= 1.38 ×RFI
k BPoint-Like 23 J/K is the Boltzmann constant, T is the thermal noise temperature and B is
Source th g
the bandwidth of the GEO SAR system.
If the ground RFIs are contributed by the point–like RFI sources (strong, localized and
continuous emitting)
2.1. Point-Like RFI Source [8,33], the powers of all the received point-source RFIs have to be summed
together. Referring to Figure 3, the total power of RFI at the receiver of GEO SAR can be expressed
If the ground RFIs are contributed by the point–like RFI sources (strong, localized and continuous
as
emitting) [8,33], the powers of all the received At
point-source
N RFIs have to be summed together. Referring
2 ofe , iGEO
RFI =
to Figure 3, the total power of RFI atPthe ⋅ P pe,i F (θSAR
receiver e , i ,ψ e , i ) ,
can be expressed as (5)
4π R i =1

where Pe is defined as the average Effective N

At Isotropic Radiated Power (EIRP) of each single point-
P =
like RFI source, p is the probability of each
RFI
4πR
· ∑ Pe,i RFI
point-like
2
pe,i Fsource,
(θe,i , ψe,ii )is
, the index, N is the number (5)
i =1
of the point-like RFI sources, θ e and ψ e indicates the position of each point-like RFI source.
where Pe is defined
Because as to
(5) relates thetheaverage
antennaEffective
pattern, Isotropic Radiated
the position Power (EIRP)
of the point-like of each
RFI source willsingle
impactpoint-like
the
power ofp is
RFI source, PRFI
the
. Aprobability
high-powerof each point-like
point-like RFI
RFI source source,
located i is the
far away index,
from N is the
the centre number
of the beam ofof the
GEO SAR
point-like RFI may have θae smaller
sources, and ψeimpact thanthe
indicates a lower power
position ofpoint-like RFI source
each point-like RFIwhich is near
source. the (5)
Because
centre of the beam of GEO SAR.
relates to the antenna pattern, the position of the point-like RFI source will impact the power of PRFI .
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 5 of 23

A high-power point-like RFI source located far away from the centre of the beam of GEO SAR may
have a smaller impact than a lower power point-like RFI source which is near the centre of the beam of
GEO SAR.

2.2. Distributed RFI Source

Practically, many RFI sources on the ground are similar and independent distributed within
a fixed area (e.g., personal electronic devices). Therefore, in this case, the emission of the RFI is
noise-like, which is very similar to a black-body.
According to the basic theory of the black-body in microwave spectrum, under the assumption
that the antenna receives the full EM field illuminated by the black-body, the antenna directivity
within the solid angle is uniform and the bandwidth is small compared with the carrier frequency,
we have [32]
PRFI = k B Bg TRFI , (6)

where TRFI is the brightness temperature contributed by the distributed RFI sources. As the antenna
area and the area of the beam foot-print are in the inverse proportion, PI will be independent on the
antenna area. It only depends on the brightness temperature contributed by the RFI and the bandwidth
of the receiver.

2.3. Average Transmitted Power Requirements in the Presence of RFI

RFI will degrade the SINR performance of a fixed GEO SAR system (e.g., specified average
transmitted power, antenna size). To meet the requirements for achieving the good performances of
remote sensing applications, we should determine the proper average transmitted power.
Considering the incoherent RFI and combining (2), the Noise-Equivalent Sigma Zero (NESZ)
NESZT can be expressed as

4πR4 λ2 k B ( TRFI + Tth )

NESZT (θd , ψ) = , (7)
Pa At 2 F2 (θd , ψ) L2loss Ta ρ a ρ g

where, especially, in the multi point-like RFI source case,

h I At
TRFI = , (8)
4πk B R2

N P p F (θ ,ψ )
e,i e,i e,i e,i
is the RFI equivalent brightness temperature, h I = ∑ B I,i is the power spectrum density,
i =1
B I is the bandwidth of the point-like RFI source and Ta is the integration time of GEO SAR. In the
distributed RFI source case, TRFI is the brightness temperature caused by the noise-like RFI.
Based on (7), in both the point-like RFI source case and the distributed RFI source case, the SINR
will have the following relationship in dB

SI NR = σ0 − NESZT , (9)

According to (9), with respect to the fixed target (specified σ0 ), to satisfy the SINR requirement for
SAR applications with a good performance (e.g., to keep the SINR above 10 dB in SAR interferometry
applications for making the coherence of the interferogram above 0.9 [34]), we should design the
average transmitted power of the GEO SAR system as

4πλ2 R4 k B ( TRFI + Tth )SI NRr

Par = , (10)
At 2 L2loss Ta ρ a ρ g σ0

where Par is the required average transmitted power of GEO SAR and SI NRr is the required SINR.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 6 of 23

3. Bistatic Scattering RFI Impact on GEO SAR

3.1. Impact of Bistatic Scattering RFI on GEO SAR

Besides the RFI impacts coming from the ground RFI directly, some other received RFI signals
may derive from the signals emitted from spaceborne radio systems (e.g., LEO SAR and GNSS satellite
system) with the same or adjacent radio frequencies and bistatic scattering from the ground [6,35–37].
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 6 of 23
The sketch of the impact of the bistatic scattering RFI case on GEO SAR is shown in Figure 4. Pia is the
average transmitted [6,35–37].
power Theofsketch
theofspaceborne
the impact of the bistaticsystem
radio scattering(RFI
RFI case on GEO SAR
source), is shown in Figure
O represents the position of
4. Pia is the average transmitted power of the spaceborne radio system (RFI source), O represents
the target, L is the the
position of the spaceborne system, Rs is the slant
position of the target, L is the position of the spaceborne
range of the spaceborne systems,
system, Rs is the slant range of the
R̂s is the unit vector from Osystems,
spaceborne to L, SRˆis the
s is the position
unit vector of
from GEOO to L , SRisisthethe
SAR, range
position of of
GEO the
SAR,GEO R isSAR, R̂ is the
unit vector from Othe torange
S, θ1ofisthethe GEO SAR, R̂ isangle
incidence the unitof the from
vector O to S, θsystem
spaceborne 1 and θ2 angle
is the incidence is the of corresponding
the
spaceborne system and θ 2 is the corresponding RFI bistatic scattering angle to GEO SAR, ẑ is the
RFI bistatic scattering angle to GEO SAR, ẑ is the normal unit vector ofˆ the scene, x̂ is the unit vector
normal unit vector of the scene, x̂ is the unit vector of the projection of R s on the scene plane, ŷ
of the projection ofis R̂ s on thebyscene
determined
plane, ŷ is determined by the cross product of orthonormal basis
the cross product of orthonormal basis ẑ and x̂, ψ s is the out-of-plane angle of
ẑ and x̂, ψs is the out-of-plane angle of the
the bistatic scattering direction, β isbistatic
the bistaticscattering direction,
angle which relates to θ 1 , θβ2 isand
theψ sbistatic
, σ B0 is theangle which
relates to θ1 , θ2 andbistatic 0
ψs , σscattering coefficient, θ RFI is the beam beamθwidth
B is the bistatic scattering coefficient, is thesystem, ofbeam
the spaceborne
width of theθ RFI
spaceborne GEO is the

system, θGEO is thewidthbeam of the GEO SAR.

width of the GEO SAR.

At
θ GEO

L R
θ RFI ẑ
β
Pia R s θ1θ 2
x̂ σ B0 ψs
O
ŷ

Figure 4. Sketch ofSketch

Figure 4. the bistatic scattering
of the bistatic RFI
scattering RFI geometry.
geometry.

3.1.1.
3.1.1. Non-Specular Non-Specular
Bistatic Bistatic Scattering
Scattering Case Case
Generally, if the bistatic scattering signal does not form a specified angle to produce the specular
Generally, if the bistatic
scattering case,scattering
non-specular signal
scatteringdoes
occursnot form a case
(out-of-plane specified
( θ = θ ,ψangle
1 2 sto in-plane
≠ 0 ) and produce casethe specular
scattering case, non-specular
( θ ≠ θ ,ψ = 0 )). scattering
1 2 occurs
For the out-of-plane
s case, σ B0 turns minimum
(out-of-plane case (θ1ψ=
when θ2 , ψs 6= 90°
s approaches andσin-plane
0) and 0
B case
is almost same with that in the in-plane case when ψ s is near 0° or 180° [38]. Thus, if we consider ◦
(θ1 6= θ2 , ψs = 0)). For the out-of-plane case, σB turns minimum when ψs approaches 90 and σB0
0
the in-plane case for the worst condition, based on the constant- γ ◦bistatic-scatter-region model [38],
is almost same with that in the in-plane case when ψs is
in-plane land clutter bistatic scattering coefficient can
near 0 or 180◦ [38]. Thus, if we consider
be approximately expressed as
the in-plane case for the worst condition, based0 on the constant-γ 1 bistatic-scatter-region model [38],
σ B = γ ( sinθ1 sinθ2 ) 2 , (11)
in-plane land clutter bistatic scattering coefficient can be approximately expressed as
where γ is the normalized reflectivity parameter, which can be estimated by
/2 1
σB0 = γ(sin θ1 sin
σ M0 θ2 ) , (11)
γ= (12)
sin θ1
where γ is the normalized reflectivity
where σM0 is the monostaticparameter, which can be estimated by
scattering coefficient.
Regardless of the large-bistatic-angle case (e.g., forward-scatter region), we simply focus on the
bistatic scattering case with the relative small bistatic
0 angle for the above analysis. Such as for ALOS-
σM
γ= (12)
sin θ1

where σM 0 is the monostatic scattering coefficient.

Regardless of the large-bistatic-angle case (e.g., forward-scatter region), we simply focus on the
bistatic scattering case with the relative small bistatic angle for the above analysis. Such as for ALOS-2
PALSAR, the bistatic angle formed by the LEO SAR and the GEO SAR is general less than 30◦ when
the LEO SAR signal is received by the GEO SAR within its antenna mainlobe. For the LEO SAR signal
 Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 7 of 23

2 PALSAR,
Remote Sens. 2018, the bistatic angle formed by the LEO SAR and the GEO SAR is general less than 30° when 7 of 23
10, 82
the LEO SAR signal is received by the GEO SAR within its antenna mainlobe. For the LEO SAR signal
received outside the GEO SAR antenna mainlobe, as there will be a large attenuation for the RFI
received
signal,outside the GEO
we ignore SAR antenna mainlobe,
the large-bistatic-angle as there although
case. Moreover, will be a the
large
GNSSattenuation for the
system and the GEO
RFI signal,
we ignore
SAR can the large-bistatic-angle
generate case.
the bistatic system Moreover,
with although
large bistatic the GNSS
angle, because σ B0system and the
is generally GEOthan
smaller SAR can
σM [38],
0
generate theabistatic
small bistatic
systemangle assumption
with is better
large bistatic for analysing
angle, becausethe 0
σB worst cases. smaller than σM
is generally 0 [38],

In the non-specular
a small bistatic case, theisreceived
angle assumption RFIanalysing
better for signal is weak as thecases.
the worst gain in the scattering direction
ofInthe
theGEO SAR is low.case, the received RFI signal is weak as the gain in the scattering direction of
non-specular
the GEO SAR is low.
3.1.2. Specular Bistatic Scattering Case
3.1.2. Specular Bistatic
At times, if θ1 =Scattering Case
θ 2 and ψ s =0 , a specular reflection happens. In this case, the power of the RFI
will concentrate
At times, if θ1 in
= the scattering
θ2 and direction
ψs = 0, of GEO
a specular SAR and
reflection the received
happens. In thisRFIcase,
signal
thefrom
powerthe of the
spaceborne system is very strong. In the specular scattering case, like a mirror reflection
RFI will concentrate in the scattering direction of GEO SAR and the received RFI signal from [32,39], σ B0 the
can be expressed
spaceborne system isasvery strong. In the specular scattering case, like a mirror reflection [32,39], σ0 can B
be expressed as 4π Ags
σ =0
B , (13)
λ 2 A gs
4π
σB0 = , (13)
λ2
where Ags is the specular scattering area on the ground. Here and in the following part, we also use
where Ags is the specular scattering area on the ground. Here and in the following part, we also use
λ as the wavelength of the spaceborne radio system for simplicity. As the targets within the same
λ asrange
the wavelength of the be
resolution cannot spaceborne radiobysystem
distinguished for delay
the range simplicity. As the
difference, targetsthe
ideally, within the same
maximum area range
resolution cannot be distinguished by the range delay difference, ideally, the maximum
of Ags can be approximately determined within the range resolution bin ρ r by the cross-section area of A gs can be
approximately
area betweendetermined within
the ellipsoid the by
formed range
GEOresolution
SAR andbin r by the cross-section
the ρspaceborne system andarea the between the ellipsoid
Earth ellipsoid,
formed by GEO SAR and the spaceborne
which has been shown in Figure 5. system and the Earth ellipsoid, which has been shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Formation of the specular scattering area.

Figure 5. Formation of the specular scattering area.
Based on the above analysis, the considerably different behaviour of the two cases derives from
Based
the on the
different above
bistatic analysis,coefficients
scattering the considerably different
which are shown inbehaviour of the
(11) and (13). twospecular
In the cases derives from the
scattering
case, the bistatic scattering coefficient is large, while it will be very small in the non-specular
different bistatic scattering coefficients which are shown in (11) and (13). In the specular scattering case,
scattering
the bistatic case.
scattering coefficient is large, while it will be very small in the non-specular scattering case.

3.1.3.3.1.3.
SINR andand
SINR Required
RequiredPower
PowerAnalysis
Analysis
In the
In the bistatic
bistatic scatteringRFI
scattering RFIcase,
case, the
the total
totalbrightness
brightnesstemperature TRFIT_RFI_sa
temperature sa cancan
be shown as as
be shown

1 R 
 P At
1  Pia,k σ B0 , k 0( t ) As
ia , k
At2  pb , k Llossb , k F (θ di , k ,ψ i , k , t ) dt
Nb b ToTTow  (θ RFI t )s)(t))2 B,k
2 σ ( t) A R(t )(t)2 pb,k Llossb,k F(θdi,k , ψi,k , t)dt
4πs 4πR
1 N
(θR s (R (14)
TRFI _ sa== 1
TRFI_sa kkB

k∑=1
T w
RFI
BI , kB
, , (14)
B k=1 I,k
where Pia , k is the average transmitted power of the kth spaceborne system, As is the coverage area
whereof Pia,k is
the the average
spaceborne transmitted
system, pb , k ispower of the kth spaceborne
the corresponding system,
illuminating As is thefor
probability coverage area of the
the bistatic
spaceborne system, p
scattering case, Tb,k is the corresponding illuminating probability for the bistatic scattering
o is the time period of one orbit for the spaceborne system, Tw is the operation
case, To is the
timetime
period of spaceborne
of the one orbit for the spaceborne
system per orbit, Lsystem, Tw is the operation time of the spaceborne system per
lossb is the transmitting loss of the RFI signal, t is the slow
orbit, Llossb is the transmitting loss of the RFI signal, t is the slow time, k is the index and Nb is the number
of the spaceborne systems. The integration in (14) refers to the variation of the bistatic scattering coefficient
and the gain of GEO SAR towards the spaceborne system within the integration time of GEO SAR.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 8 of 23

As changes in different cases, when θRFI > θGEO (e.g., GNSS system) or θRFI < θGEO (e.g., LEO
SAR system), which
Remote Sens. can
2018, 10, 82 be shown as 8 of 23

time, k is the index and N b is the number ( of the spaceborne systems. The integration in (14) refers
2
to the variation of the bistatic scattering (θGEO R)and, θRFI > θof
GEO
As = coefficient 2
the gain GEO. SAR towards the spaceborne (15)
system within the integration time of GEO R
(θSAR.
RFI s ) , θ RFI < θ GEO
As changes in different cases, when θ RFI > θ GEO (e.g., GNSS system) or θ RFI < θ GEO (e.g., LEO
SAR
Based onsystem),
(6) andwhich
(14),can be SINR
the shown in as the bistatic scattering RFI case can be written as

 (θ GEO R )2 , θ RFI > θ GEO

As =  4πλ22 R4 k (T . + T (15)
RFI_sa )
(θ RFI Rs ) , θ RFI < θ GEO
B th
SINR(θd , ψ) = 2 2 2
. (16)
Pa At F (θd , ψ)Lloss Ta ρa ρg σ0
Based on (6) and (14), the SINR in the bistatic scattering RFI case can be written as
Likewise, being the same with (10), we can 4πλ 2 Ruse
4
k B (T(16)
th +TRFI _ sa )
to obtain the average transmitted power
SINR (θ d ,ψ ) = . (16)
requirement of GEO SAR Par for meeting Pa At F (θ d ,ψ ) LlossTa ρthe
the required
2 2
SINR 2
in a ρ gσpresence
0 of the spaceborne system RFI.
Likewise, being the same with (10), we can use (16) to obtain the average transmitted power
3.2. Doppler Filtering
requirement of GEO SAR Par for meeting the required SINR in the presence of the spaceborne
system RFI.
Specially, if our interesting target is point-like and isolated, the received pulses will have
deterministic phases.
3.2. Doppler Filtering
In this case, Doppler filtering on RFI signal will have a good performance
to weaken the RFI impact. Figure 6a shows the geometry difference between GEO SAR and LEO SAR.
Specially, if our interesting target is point-like and isolated, the received pulses will have
vs and vgdeterministic
are the velocity vectors of the LEO SAR system and the GEO SAR system, respectively. Vectors
phases. In this case, Doppler filtering on RFI signal will have a good performance to
Rs and Rweaken
represent
the RFIthe incidence
impact. Figure direction
6a shows the(line of sight
geometry (LOS))
difference and the
between GEObistatic
SAR andscattering
LEO SAR. direction,
respectively. ϑ is vthe
v s and LOS
g are the angle
velocitybetween s and
vectors ofvthe LEORSARs . GEO
systemSAR andhas
the a larger
GEO SARbeam
system,footprint (e.g., typically
respectively.
Vectors
400 km) than R s of
that and
LEO R SARrepresent thetypically
(e.g., incidence direction
10 km (line of sight (LOS)) and
in along-track). the bistaticthe
Moreover, scattering
velocity of GEO
direction, respectively. ϑ is the LOS angle between v s and R s . GEO SAR has a larger beam
SAR is small compared with that of a LEO SAR. Resultantly, the Doppler rate of GEO SAR is very small
footprint (e.g., typically 400 km) than that of LEO SAR (e.g., typically 10 km in along-track). Moreover,
comparedthewith thatofof
velocity GEOa LEO
SAR is SAR.
smallTo achievewith
compared thethat
sameof a azimuth
LEO SAR. resolution, theDoppler
Resultantly, the Doppler ratebandwidth
of of
GEO SAR GEO is much smaller
SAR is very small(only
compareddozens of Hz
with that of a at
LEO most)
SAR. than the Doppler
To achieve bandwidth
the same azimuth of a LEO SAR
resolution,
(hundredsthetoDoppler
thousandsbandwidthHz), ofwhich
GEO SAR is muchin
is shown smaller
Figure (only
6b.dozens of Hz at
Moreover, asmost) than the
the pulse Doppler frequency
repetition
bandwidth of a LEO SAR (hundreds to thousands Hz), which is shown in Figure 6b. Moreover, as
(PRF) of GEO SAR is still smaller than the Doppler bandwidth of a LEO SAR, the Doppler frequency of
the pulse repetition frequency (PRF) of GEO SAR is still smaller than the Doppler bandwidth of a
a LEO SARLEOwillSAR,bethealiased.
DopplerWhen doing
frequency the Doppler
of a LEO SAR will be filtering in thedoing
aliased. When imaging processing,
the Doppler filteringainGEO system
achieves the
theimaging
azimuth focusing
processing, by exploiting
a GEO system achieves thethesmall Doppler
azimuth focusing bandwidth.
by exploitingTherefore, the components
the small Doppler
bandwidth.
of the LEO SAR RFI Therefore,
Doppler thespectrum
componentsout of the LEODoppler
of the SAR RFI Doppler
bandwidthspectrum out ofSAR
of GEO the Doppler
could be filtered,
bandwidth of GEO SAR could be filtered, as shown as the yellow regions in Figure 6b. It should be
as shown as the yellow regions in Figure 6b. It should be noticed that the aliased Doppler frequencies
noticed that the aliased Doppler frequencies of the LEO SAR within the GEO SAR Doppler
of the LEO SAR within
bandwidth cannotthe GEO out.
be filtered SAR Doppler bandwidth cannot be filtered out.

Figure 6. (a) Geometry relationship between LEO SAR and GEO SAR; (b) Doppler bandwidths of
(a) Geometry
Figure 6.GEO relationship
SAR and LEO SAR. between LEO SAR and GEO SAR; (b) Doppler bandwidths of GEO
SAR and LEO SAR.

As the integration time of GEO SAR (hundreds of second or even hours) is far longer than that in
a LEO SAR (typically 1 s), if we assume the LEO SAR observes the target within the integration time of
the GEO SAR in a worst case (like a staring mode), the LEO SAR signal can be simplified as weighted
by the envelope of GEO SAR. Moreover, the worst geometry relationship between the GEO SAR and
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 9 of 23

LEO SAR is assumed as well, which makes the RFI signal of LEO SAR be weighted by the GEO SAR
antenna pattern. Under the assumption, the received RFI signal from the LEO SAR is expressed as

vg Lg
  
2 4πRs (t)
sl (t)= A sin c t exp j
λR0 λ
(17)
2 vg Lg
    
4R0,l 2
= A sin c t exp jπ + f dc,l t + f dr,l t + · · · ,
λR0 λ

where A (relates to SINR) is the amplitude of the RFI, L g is the antenna size of GEO SAR, v g is the
velocity of GEO SAR, R0,l is the shortest slant range of Rs , f dr,l is the Doppler rate of the LEO SAR,
f dc,l is the Doppler centroid frequency of the LEO SAR. Sinc function represents the envelope of the
GEO SAR signal.
The received GEO SAR signal is

vg Lg
   
4 4πR(t)
sl (t)= sin c t exp j
λR0 λ
(18)
v L
    
4 g g 4R0 2
= sin c t exp jπ + f dc,g t + f dr,g t + · · · ,
λR0 λ

where R0 is the shortest slant range of GEO SAR, f dr,g is the Doppler rate of the GEO SAR, f dc,g is the
Doppler centroid frequency of the GEO SAR.
The energy of the LEO SAR RFI signal E after Doppler filtering is
 2
Ta  Ta
2  R2   h  i   h i 
v L 2
E = A2 sin c2 λR0 u exp jπ λ4 R0,l + f dc,l u + f dr,l u2 · rect t−
g g u
R

 Ta exp − jπ f dr,g (t − u) du dt. (19)
− Ta − Ta
2 2


Expanding the exponent terms and combining them, ignoring the impact of the antenna pattern
for simplicity, we have

T
a    2
Z2  f dc,l − f dc,g
2 
A2 A2 Ta

π 
E ≈   exp j   + f dr,g t  dt ≈  . (20)
 f dr,l − f dr,g 
 
f dr,l − f dr,g 2  f dr,l − f dr,g 

− T2a
 

In the meantime, the energy of the effective GEO SAR signal Em after Doppler filtering is
expressed as

 1 2
 Ta
f dc,g Ta i 
R  R2 
v L
 h  i   h
Em = 
 sinc4 λR g g
0
u exp jπ λ4 R0 + f dc,g u + f dr,g u2 · rect t−
Ta
u
exp − jπ f dr,g (t − u)2 du dt. (21)
−1  Ta
−
f dc,g Ta 2


Simplifying the equation, we have

0.9Ta
Em ≈  . (22)
 f dr,g 


The ratio between the energy of the GEO SAR signal and the energy of the RFI after Doppler
filtering is shown as  
f − f
 
Em 0.9 dr,l
 dr,g  PRFg
<= ≈ 2   · , (23)
E A  f dr,g 
  f dr,l Ta

where PRFg is the pulse repetition frequency of GEO SAR. If GEO SAR uses a small PRF, the Doppler
spectrum of the RFI will be aliased, leading to a small value of <, that, in turn results in a small
SINR. The difference of the Doppler rates of GEO SAR and LEO SAR is the parameter to describe the
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 10 of 23

attenuation of LEO SAR RFI signal after Doppler filtering. A higher difference between the Doppler
rates of GEO SAR and LEO SAR will be helpful to raise <. A higher < indicates a better imaging
performance of GEO SAR in the presence of LEO SAR RFI.
In the case of the distributed target, the LEO SAR illuminates it with a PRF that causes the
backscattered returns to be independent, white. The LEO-GEO bistatic scattering will then be nearly
white and performance of the Doppler filtering will lose.

4. Performance Evaluation and Discussion: Example of GEO SAR Design

In this section, we evaluate the performance of GEO SAR in the presence of RFI by using System
Tool Kit (STK) software to generate the GEO SAR orbit, LEO SAR orbits and the GNSS orbits for
the simulation. The High-Precision Orbit Propagator (HPOP) in STK is adopted to obtain more
accurate orbit simulation. The input parameters of our inclined orbit GEO SAR system are given in
Table 2 [19,21]. We consider the classical “Figure 8” inclined GEO SAR orbit with the small eccentricity
and the large inclination. The designed GEO SAR system can work in three frequency bands (L, C and
X). The large antenna size is utilized to obtain the higher gain of the GEO SAR signal.

Table 2. Classical parameters of the inclined orbit GEO SAR system.

Parameter Value Parameter Value

Carrier central frequency (GHz) 1.25/5.4/9.6 Inclination (◦ ) 10–60
Look angle (◦ ) 2–7 Argument of perigee (◦ ) 270
Eccentricity 0.07 Antenna area (m2 ) 531
Duty cycle (%) 15 Incidence angle (◦ ) 10–60
Bandwidth (MHz) 18 Integration time (s) 30–250
Polarization HH Equivalent thermal noise (K) 879

The performance of a GEO SAR defined in Table 2, is shown in Table 3. We assume that both
the antenna size and the swath are kept constant with different frequencies (from L band to X band),
by using scan SAR mode. From Table 2, when the working frequency of GEO SAR increases from the
L band to X band, the number of beams will accordingly change from 1 to 64 to keep the coverage
requirement. We design the basic SINR requirement as 10 dB to make the system reach the imaging
requirement for interferometric applications. Proper signal bandwidth and integration times make the
GEO SAR system have range and azimuth resolutions better than 20m.

Table 3. Performance of GEO SAR system.

Parameter Value Parameter Value

1 (L band)
Number of beams 16 (C band) SINR (dB) 10
64 (X band)
Resolution (m) <20 × <20 (Single look) Coverage (km) 400 × 400

4.1. Impact of Ground RFI

In the simulation of the ground RFI case, the location of the beam centre of the GEO SAR is
set in Beijing (40◦ N, 116◦ E), when the GEO SAR is at the orbit position of 162◦ true anomaly with
a 2.6◦ look angle. Moreover, we assume the one-way signal loss of GEO SAR is 3 dB. According to the
analysis of the real RFI data obtained by the spaceborne systems in the appendix, as the RFI brightness
temperature is general thousands of Kelvin, the scope of the RFI brightness temperature in the analysis
is from 0 to 10,000 K.
According to the SINR requirement in Table 3, the average transmitted power requirement of
the GEO SAR system with the variation of RFI intensity and the distance from the position of the
 RemoteSens.
Remote Sens.2018,
2018,10,
10,82
82 11ofof23
11 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 11 of 23
Accordingtotothe
According theSINR
SINRrequirement
requirementininTable Table3,3,thetheaverage
averagetransmitted
transmittedpower powerrequirement
requirementofof
the GEO SAR system with the variation of RFI intensity and
the GEO SAR system with the variation of RFI intensity and the distance from the position the distance from the positionofofthe the
point-like
point-likeRFIRFI source
RFIsource to the
sourcetotothe beam
thebeam centre
beamcentre of
centreofofGEOGEO
GEOSAR SAR is shown
SARisisshown in Figure
shownininFigure 7. The
Figure7.7.The average
Theaverage transmitted
averagetransmitted
transmitted
point-like
power requirements in all three working frequencies will increase with the with
increasing of the brightness
power requirements in all three working frequencies will increase with the increasing ofof the
power requirements in all three working frequencies will increase the increasing the
temperature.
brightness In the meantime,
temperature. In the the averagethe
meantime, transmitted
average power requirements
transmitted power are also very
requirements are sensitive
also very
brightness temperature. In the meantime, the average transmitted power requirements are also very
to the relative
sensitive distance
relativebetween the beam the centre of GEO
centreSAR and SAR
the position of the point-like RFI.
sensitive totothe
the relative distancebetween
distance between the beambeam centre ofofGEO
GEO SAR and andthe
theposition
position ofofthe
thepoint-
point-
When the
likeRFI.
RFI.Whendistance
Whenthe increases,
thedistance the
distanceincreases,average
increases,the transmitted
theaverage power
averagetransmitted requirement
transmittedpower will
powerrequirement decrease,
requirementwill because
willdecrease, the
decrease,
like
power
because of the
the power
RFI after weighting byweighting
the antenna pattern of GEO SARofbecomes small. Taking the
because the power ofofthe
the RFIafter
RFI after weighting by bythetheantenna
antenna pattern
pattern GEOSAR
of GEO SAR becomes
becomes small.
small.
LTaking
band system
theLLband and the
bandsystem brightness
systemand andthe temperature
thebrightness
brightnesstemperatureof 5000 K as
temperatureofof5000 an example,
5000KKas asan when
anexample, the
example,when distance
whenthe changes
thedistance
distance
Taking the
from 0 to from
changes 60 km, 0 the
to 60 average
km, the transmitted
average power requirements
transmitted power varies from
requirements more
varies from than
more2.4than
kW to2.4less
kW
changes from 0 to 60 km, the average transmitted power requirements varies from more than 2.4 kW
than 2.3 kW. At last, because of the shorter wavelength, the smaller beam width and the higher
totoless
lessthan
than2.3 2.3kW.
kW.At Atlast,
last,because
becauseofofthe theshorter
shorterwavelength,
wavelength,the thesmaller
smallerbeam beamwidth
widthandandthe thehigher
higher
backscatter coefficient, comparing the three sub-figures in Figure 7,7,aahigher frequency isishelpful to
backscatter coefficient, comparing the three sub-figures in Figure 7, a higher frequency is helpful toto
backscatter coefficient, comparing the three sub-figures in Figure higher frequency helpful
reduce the
reducethe required
therequired average
requiredaverage transmitted
averagetransmitted
transmittedpower. power. Under
power.Under Underthe the case
thecase
caseofof
ofaaa5000
5000
5000K brightness
brightnesstemperature
reduce KKbrightness temperature
temperature
RFI and
RFIand locating
andlocating at 60
locatingatat6060kmkm away
kmawayawayfromfrom
fromthethe centre
thecentre of
centreofofthethe GEO
theGEO
GEOSAR SAR beam,
SARbeam,
beam,the the average
theaverage transmitted
averagetransmitted
transmittedpowerpower
power
RFI
requirement
requirement changes
changes from
from about
about 2.3
2.3 kW
kW totoonly
only 0.2
0.2 WW from
from LL band
band to
toX Xband.
band. Thus,
Thus, an
anL L band
band GEO
GEO
requirement changes from about 2.3 kW to only 0.2 W from L band to X band. Thus, an L band GEO
SAR
SAR system
system needs
needs aahigher
higher transmit
transmit power
power totocompensate
compensate the
theRFI
RFI impact.
impact.
SAR system needs a higher transmit power to compensate the RFI impact.
L band (kW) C band (kW) X band (kW)
0 L band (kW) 0 C band (kW) 0 X band (kW)
0 0 0
4 0.4
4 0.4 0.15
0.15

Distance (km)
Distance (km)

Distance (km)

20 20 20

Distance (km)
Distance (km)

Distance (km)

20 3 20 0.3 20
3 0.3 0.1
0.1
2 0.2
40 2 40 0.2 40
40 40 40 0.05
0.1 0.05
1 0.1
1
60 60 60
60 0 5000 10000 60 0 60 0 5000 10000
5000 10000 0 Brightness5000 10000
0 Brightness5000 10000
temperature (K) 0 Brightness5000 10000 temperature (K)
temperature (K) Brightness temperature (K)
Brightness temperature (K) Brightness temperature (K)

(a)
(a) (b) (c)
(c)
(b)
Figure 7.7. Average
Figure Average transmitted
Average transmitted power
transmitted power requirements
power requirements in
requirements in GEO
in GEO SAR
GEO SAR systems
SAR systems of
systems of different
of different working
working
frequencies. (a) L band; (b) C band; (c) X band, to ensure a SINR better than 10
frequencies. (a) L band; (b) C band; (c) X band, to ensure a SINR better than 10 dB. dB.

Likewise, shownininFigure
Likewise, Figure 8,ininthe
the caseofofdistributed
distributed RFI,the theaverage
averagetransmitted
transmitted power
Likewise, shown
shown in Figure 8, 8, in the case
case of distributed RFI,
RFI, the average transmitted power
power
requirement
requirement will
will increase
increase when
when the
the RFI
RFI brightness
brightness temperature
temperature turns
turns higher.
higher. In the
In the meantime,
meantime,
requirement will increase when the RFI brightness temperature turns higher. In the meantime,
similarly,the
similarly, theGEO
GEOSAR SARsystem
systemwith
withaahigher
higherworking
workingfrequency
frequency alsohashas amuch
muchlower
lower average
similarly, the GEO SAR system with a higher working frequency also
also has aa much lower average
average
transmitted
transmitted power requirement in the distributed RFI case, which suggests the system will beeasier
easier
transmitted power
power requirement
requirement in
in the
the distributed
distributed RFI
RFI case,
case, which
which suggests
suggests the
the system
system will
will be
be easier
to
to be implemented. Nevertheless, as the interference is uniform, the impact does not depend on the
to be
be implemented.
implemented. Nevertheless,
Nevertheless, asas the
the interference
interference is
is uniform,
uniform, the
the impact
impact does
does not
not depend
depend on on the
the
positions ofthe
positions theRFI
RFIand
andthe
thebeam
beamcentre
centreofofGEO
GEOSAR.
SAR.
positions of
of the RFI and the beam centre of GEO SAR.
6
6 L band
Average power (kw)

L band
Average power (kw)

C band
C band
4 X band
4 X band

2
2

0
00 5000 10000
0 Brightness5000
temperature (K) 10000
Brightness temperature (K)

Figure 8.Average
Figure Average transmittedpower
power requirementininthe
the distributedRFI
RFIcase.
case.
Figure 8.
8. Average transmitted
transmitted power requirement
requirement in the distributed
distributed RFI case.
4.2. ImpactofofBistatic
4.2. Bistatic ScatteringRFI
RFI
4.2. Impact
Impact of Bistatic Scattering
Scattering RFI
4.2.1. LEOSAR
4.2.1. SAR BistaticScattering
Scattering RFICaseCase Analysis
4.2.1. LEO
LEO SAR Bistatic
Bistatic Scattering RFI
RFI Case Analysis
Analysis
Inthis
In thispart,
part,we
weanalyse
analyse thebistatic
bistaticscattering
scatteringRFI
RFIimpacts
impactsofofLEO
LEOSARSARon onGEO
GEOSAR.
SAR. In Table44
In this part, we analyse thethe
bistatic scattering RFI impacts of LEO SAR on GEO SAR. In TableIn4 Table
[40–45],
[40–45],
[40–45], the
the utilized
utilized system
system parameters
parameters of
of the
the main
main LL band,
band, C C band
band and
and XX band
band LEO
LEO SARsystems
SAR systemsinin
the utilized system parameters of the main L band, C band and X band LEO SAR systems in the simulation
thesimulation
the simulationare are given,including
including mostimportant
importantparameters
parametersabout
aboutthe
thepower
powerand andthe
theorbit.
orbit.ItItcan
can
are given, includinggiven,
most important mostparameters about the power and the orbit. It can be noted that the
be
be noted that
notedofthat the number of the LEO SAR systems is large, because some of the systems are formed
number thethe
LEO number of the LEO
SAR systems SARbecause
is large, systems is large,
some of thebecause
systemssome of the systems
are formed are a
by not only formed
single
bynot
by notonly
onlyaasingle
singlesatellite
satellitebut
butmany
manysatellites
satellitesas
asaaconstellation.
constellation.
satellite but many satellites as a constellation.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 12 of 23

Table 4. Utilized system parameters of the main LEO SAR (L, C and X bands) in the simulation.

Frequency L Band C Band X Band

SAR ALOS-2 Tandem-L SAOCOM-1A/B Sentinel-1A/B Radarsat-2 RCM TanDEM-X/PAZ COSMO-SkyMed SAR-Lupe KOMPSAT-5
Peak power (W) 5100 3622 3100 4368 2280 1600 2260 7600 1700
250 (total)
Duty cycle of power (%) 8 4 5 12 12 13.75 18 11 35
Orbit period (min) 98.5 99.7 97.2 98.5 100.7 96.4 95.0 95.8
20% (max) 20% (assumed)
Working time per orbit (min) 49 30 5–20 25, 74 (wave mode) 28 15 3 2
Satellite number 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 4 5 1
Average transmitted power (W) 203 44 32 394 76 34 13 167 50 13
Bandwidth (MHz) 42 (middle) 84 50 100 100 100 150/300 400 300 (assumed) 120
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 13 of 23

The orbits of the ALOS-2 PALSAR, Sentinel-1 A and TerraSAR-X have been used as the examples
of L-, C- and X band LEO SAR systems to calculate the occurrence probabilities of non-specular
scattering case, specular scattering case and mainlobe to mainlobe specular scattering case by STK
software. The analysis result of the occurrence probabilities is provided in Table 5. The occurrence
probabilities are obtained based on the orbit simulation of the GEO SAR and the LEO SAR with
different periods, which are the repeat orbit cycles of the three systems (14-day, 12-day and 11-day,
respectively). For all three considered working frequencies, because the GEO SAR can often ‘see’
the LEO SAR due to its high running orbit, the non-specular scattering case has a high occurrence
probability of about 40%. In contrast, due to the strict condition of the occurrence of the specular
scattering case, the occurrence probabilities in all working frequencies are very low, less than 0.1%.
In fact, the calculation for the specular scattering case gives out the worst case, because the practical
occurrence of the specular scattering is also determined by many factors, such as the incidence angle
and the type of the scene. As the beam width of the LEO SAR turns smaller with the increasing of
the frequency, the occurrence probability decreases further for the X band system compared with the
L band or C band systems. Owing to the very little occurrence probability, mainlobe to mainlobe
specular scattering case has never happened during the simulation.
The average transmitted power requirements in GEO SAR in the presence of the LEO SAR bistatic
scattering RFI are shown in Table 5. Some geometry parameters used in the simulation are given in the
caption. To analyse the worst case, we consider the received LEO SAR signal is weighted by the envelope of
the GEO SAR one dimensional antenna pattern within the integration time. According to their working
frequencies, the LEO SAR satellites in Table 5 are classified and used as the input RFI sources. To simplify
the analysis, different satellites are assumed having the same illuminating geometry for GEO SAR.
Under the non-specular reflection case, the average transmitted power requirements in all three
frequencies of GEO SAR are very low. Even for an L band GEO SAR, the required average transmitted
power is only 0.7 kW. However, although the probability of the specular scattering case is very
small, very large average transmitted power requirements are needed for GEO SAR to reach the
designed SINR regardless of the working frequencies when the specular scattering case happened.
Especially for the L band system, average transmitted power requirement even turns to 1.1 × 109 kW,
which is impossible to be achieved. Deriving from the higher gain, the stronger backscatter and
lower occurrence probability of the specular scattering case, a high frequency GEO SAR system will
be more resistant to LEO SAR bistatic scattering RFI impact. Moreover, the results also depend on
the distance between the LEO SAR beam centre and the GEO SAR beam centre. When the distance
increases, the average transmitted power requirements will decrease. When the distance increases to
about 5000 km, the average transmitted power requirement turns to about 2.4 × 104 kW rather than
1.1 × 109 kW for an L band GEO SAR. In the non-specular scattering case, as the RFI signal is very
weak, the distance has the negligible impact on the design requirement.

Table 5. Occurrence probability of the LEO SAR bistatic scattering RFI and the average transmitted
power requirement in GEO SAR (HH polarization, Shrub scene, in the specular scattering
case: θ1 = θ2 = 30◦ , in the non-specular case: θ1 = 30◦ , θ2 = 45◦ ).

Parameters L C X
Non-specular scattering 44.8 38.1 39.0
Occurrence probability (%) Specular scattering 5.0 × 10−2 1.5 × 10−2 2.0 × 10−3
Mainlobe to mainlobe specular scattering 0 0 0
σ 0 (dB) −14.8 −9.7 −7.6
0 0.7 6.0 × 10−2 2.0 × 10−2
Non-specular scattering
5000 km 0.7 5.2 × 10−2 1.8 × 10−2
Required average transmitted power (kW) 0 1.1 × 109 3.2 × 107 4.7 × 105
Specular scattering
5000 km 2.4 × 104 7.8 3.7 × 10−2
Mainlobe to mainlobe specular scattering - - -
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 14 of 23

4.2.2. GNSS Bistatic Scattering RFI Case Analysis

GNSS has been designed to work only in L band. Nevertheless, although Global Positioning
System (GPS), Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) and Galileo satellites are Medium Earth
orbit (MEO) satellites, Beidou-2 satellites have different orbit types, including the MEO, geostationary
orbit (GEOS) and inclined geosynchronous orbit (IGSO). Some important utilized system parameters
of the main GNSS are given in Table 6 [46–50]. Orbiton software is used to calculate the number of
GNSS satellites simultaneously in the sky above Beijing.

Table 6. Utilized system parameters of the main GNSS in the simulation.

Navigation System GPS GLONASS Galileo Beidou-2

130 (MEO)
Transmit power (W) 240 135 265
185 (IGSO/GEO)
6 (GEO)
Satellite number above the scene 13 11 8 8 (IGSO)
5 (MEO)
Bandwidth (MHz) 2 10 4 20

GPS satellite, Beidou-2 IGSO satellite and GEOS satellite are used as the examples of MEO satellite,
IGSO satellite and GEOS satellite to calculate the occurrence probabilities of non-specular scattering
case, the specular scattering case and the mainlobe to mainlobe specular scattering case in the GNSS
bistatic scattering RFI case. The occurrence probabilities are given in Table 7. We obtain the occurrence
probabilities by virtue of 10-day orbit simulation of GEO SAR and GNSS satellites. Because of the
higher orbit and the wider beam width of GNSS, GNSS bistatic scattering RFI cases have very high
occurrence probabilities. Probabilities for non-specular and specular scattering cases in GEOS and
IGSO cases are 100%. The MEO satellite even has nearly 100% for non-specular and the specular
scattering cases. Because of the very large beam width of the GNSS antenna, mainlobe to mainlobe
specular scattering case can even occurrence.
The average transmitted power requirements in GEO SAR in the presence of GNSS bistatic
scattering RFI is shown in Table 7. The geometry parameters used in the simulation are marked in
the caption. As the mainlobe to mainlobe specular scattering case is the worst case, we discuss this
case. The GNSS satellites given in Table 6 are used as the input RFI sources. To simplify the analysis,
different satellites are regarded to have the same illuminating geometry for GEO SAR.

Table 7. Occurrence probability of the GNSS bistatic scattering RFI case and the average transmitted
power requirement in GEO SAR (HH polarization, Shrub scene, in the specular scattering case:
θ1 = θ2 = 30◦ , in the non-specular case: θ1 = 30◦ , θ2 = 45◦ ).

Parameters Value
MEO 96.9
Non-specular scattering IGSO 100.0
GEO stationary 100.0
MEO 96.9
Probability (%) Specular scattering IGSO 100.0
GEO stationary 100.0
MEO 9.0
Mainlobe to mainlobe
IGSO 22.5
specular scattering
GEO stationary 48.4
Non-specular scattering 0.7
Required average Specular scattering -
transmitted power (kW)
Mainlobe to mainlobe 2.2 × 108 (As ≈ 30 km × 30 km (maximum))
specular scattering 0.8 (As = 100 m × 100 m)
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 15 of 23

From Table 7, it can be noted that the required average transmitted power is very small in the
non-specular scattering case and the GNSS bistatic scattering RFI has little impact on GEO SAR.
However, because of the large number of the GNSS satellites and the high gain, much worse in the
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 15 of 23
specular
Remotescattering
Sens. 2018, 10,case,
82 the required average transmitted power is very high in the specular 15 of 23 case,
if weHowever,
considerbecause
the maximum A
of the largegsnumber of the GNSS satellites and the high gain, much worse in the area
(about 30 km wide). In fact, due to the roughness, the specular
However,
can specular because
be very scattering
small (e.g., of100
themlarge number
× 100 m), of the
the GNSS satellites
required average and the high gain, much worseSARin the
case, the required average transmitted powertransmitted
is very high power of GEO
in the specular case, if is less
specular scattering case, the required average transmitted power is very high in the specular case, if
thanwe1 kW, which
consider thecan be achieved
maximum to mitigate
Ags (about the RFI
30 km wide). In impact.
fact, due to the roughness, the specular area
we consider the maximum Ags (about 30 km wide). In fact, due to the roughness, the specular area
can be very small (e.g., 100 m × 100 m), the required average transmitted power of GEO SAR is less
4.2.3. can be veryFiltering
Doppler small (e.g., 100 m × 100 m), the required average transmitted power of GEO SAR is less
than 1 kW, which can Analysis
be achieved to mitigate the RFI impact.
than 1 kW, which can be achieved to mitigate the RFI impact.
As we discussed in Section 3.2, we can conduct the Doppler filtering for the LEO SAR signal.
4.2.3. Doppler Filtering Analysis
Shown 4.2.3. Doppler9 Filtering
in Figure (assuming Analysis
the power of the LEO SAR signal is the same with that of the GEO
SAR signal), As we discussed
a large in
Doppler Section 3.2, we can
difference conduct bethe Doppler forfiltering forthe
the LEO
LEO SAR signal.
As we discussed in Section 3.2, webias
can will
conduct helpful
the Doppler reducing
filtering for the LEOSAR SAR RFI energy
signal.
Shown in Figure 9 (assuming the power of the LEO SAR signal is the same with that of the GEO SAR
after Shown
imaging. When9 (assuming
in Figure the Doppler the rate
power difference
of the LEOisSAR large, shown
signal is thein Figure
same with9a,thatthe LEO
of the GEO SAR SAR signal
signal), a large Doppler difference bias will be helpful for reducing the LEO SAR RFI energy after
after signal),
filteringa is noise-like with only about − 40 dB level. Otherwise, the
large Doppler difference bias will be helpful for reducing the LEO SAR RFI energy after
imaging. When the Doppler rate difference is large, shown in Figure 9a, the LEO SAR signal after
peak of the LEO SAR signal
imaging.
afterfiltering
filtering When
will be thecomparable
Doppler ratewith difference is large, shown in GEO
Figure 9a, the LEO shown
SAR signal after 9b.
is noise-like with only about −40the
dBamplitude of the
level. Otherwise, the peakSAR of thesignal
LEO SAR in after
signal Figure
filtering is noise-like
The filtering
relationship between with
the only about
various LOS −40angles,
dB level.the Otherwise,
PRF of the the
GEOpeak of the
SAR, theLEO SAR signal
working after and
frequency
will be comparable with the amplitude of the GEO SAR signal shown in Figure 9b. The
filtering
the ratio will beincomparable
are given Figure 10. with
From the amplitude of the find
GEOthat SARasignal shown in Figure 9b. The
relationship between the various LOSthe figure,
angles, thewe
PRFcan of the GEO SAR,larger LOS angle,
the working a higher
frequency andPRF of
relationship between the various LOS angles, the PRF of the GEO SAR, the working frequency and
the GEO
the ratioSAR areand
giventheinlower
Figureworking
10. Fromfrequency
the figure, are
we canthe find
effective
that amethods
larger LOS toangle,
improve the performance
a higher PRF of
the ratio are given in Figure 10. From the figure, we can find that a larger LOS angle, a higher PRF of
the GEOfiltering
of Doppler SAR andin thethe
lower working
presence offrequency
the LEO are SAR theRFI.
effective methods to improve
The improvement derivesthe from
performance
that they are
the GEO SAR and the lower working frequency are the effective methods to improve the performance
of
helpful Doppler filtering
to filter filtering in
the RFI in the
energypresence of the
outsideofthe LEO SAR RFI. The improvement derives from that they are
of Doppler the presence the GEO
LEO SARSARRFI. Doppler bandwidthderives
The improvement by increasing
from thatthe difference
they are
helpful
of thehelpful
Dopplerto filter the
spectra RFI energy
between outside the GEO SAR Doppler bandwidth by increasing the difference
to filter the RFI energythe LEO the
outside SAR GEO andSARGEO SAR, bandwidth
Doppler as well as decreasing
by increasing the
thealias. However,
difference
of the Doppler spectra between the LEO SAR and GEO SAR, as well as decreasing the alias. However,
as theofPRF and the working
the Doppler frequency
spectra between the LEOalsoSAR
depend
and GEOon the imaging
SAR, as wellswath and applications,
as decreasing they should
the alias. However,
as the PRF and the working frequency also depend on the imaging swath and applications, they
be traded-off
as the PRFduring and the the GEO SAR
working system
frequency alsodesign.
dependIn onthethe meantime,
imaging swath LOSand angle is determined
applications, they by
should be traded-off during the GEO SAR system design. In the meantime, LOS angle is determined
should beof
the geometry traded-off
the LEO during
SAR the GEO Because
system. SAR system the design.
LEO In the
SAR meantime,
generally LOS angle
works in is determined
broadside imaging,
by the geometry of the LEO SAR system. Because the LEO SAR generally works in broadside imaging,
LOSLOS by
anglethe geometry
is often of
largethe LEO
enough SAR system. Because the LEO SAR generally works in broadside imaging,
angle is often large enoughfor forDoppler filtering.
Doppler filtering.
LOS angle is often large enough for Doppler filtering.
0 0
0 0
-20
-20 -20
-20 -40
Amplitude (dB)

Amplitude (dB)

-40
Amplitude (dB)

-40
Amplitude (dB)

-60
-40
-60
-60 -80
-60 -80
-100
-80 -100
-80 GEO SAR signal -120 GEO SAR signal
GEO
LEO SAR
SAR signal
RFI signal -120 GEO
LEO SAR
SAR signal
RFI signal
-100 LEO SAR RFI signal -140 LEO SAR RFI signal
-60
-100 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
-140
-60 -40 -20 Time (s)
0 20 40 60 -60 -40 -20 Time (s)
0 20 40 60
Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 9. GEO SAR and LEO SAR RFI signals after Doppler filtering: (a) about 300 Hz/s2 Doppler rate2 Doppler rate
Figure 9. GEO
Figure SARSAR
9. GEO andand
LEOLEOSAR
SAR RFI
RFIsignals
signalsafter
after Doppler filtering:(a)
Doppler filtering: (a)about
about300300 Hz/s
Hz/s 2 Doppler rate
difference; (b) about 0.024 Hz/s22 Doppler rate difference.
difference; (b) about
difference; 0.024
(b) about Hz/s
0.024 Hz/sDoppler
2 Doppler rate difference.
rate difference.

Figure 10. (a) ratio and the LOS angle ϑ (L band); (b) average ratio (averaged by ϑ within 0°–90°)
Figure(a)
10. (a) ratio
andand the LOS angleϑ (L band);
(L band);
(b)(b)
ϑaverageratio
ratio (averaged by ϑ
within 0°–90°)
( ϑ = 90°). (averaged by ϑ within 0 –90 ) and
◦ ◦
Figure the PRFratio
and10. (L band);the LOS
(c) ratio angle
and the working frequencyaverage
and the PRF (L band); (c) ratio and the working frequency
the PRF (L band); (c) ratio and the working frequency (ϑ = 90 ). ( ϑ ◦ = 90°).
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 16 of 23

5. Conclusions
In this paper, the analysis of SINR and the average transmitted power requirement of GEO SAR
system in the presence of RFI impact are discussed. Two RFI cases, the ground RFI and the bistatic
scattering RFIs from the LEO SAR and GNSS systems, are considered.
In the ground RFI case, the average transmitted power requirement depends on the RFI intensity
and system frequency. A lower RFI intensity and a higher frequency can help to reduce the required
average transmitted power, which makes the system more practical to be implemented. Moreover,
for the point-like RFI sources, the relative distance between the beam centre of GEO SAR and the
position of the point-like RFI also affects the required average transmitted power of GEO SAR.
The average transmitted power requirement will decrease when the position of the point-like RFI is far
away from the position of the GEO SAR beam centre.
With respect to the bistatic scattering RFI, in LEO SAR RFI case, the non-specular scattering case
has a high occurrence probability of about 40%, while the occurrence of the specular scattering case is
very low, less than 0.1%. Under the non-specular scattering case, no special requirements for average
transmitted power are needed. However, when the specular scattering case happens, we can obtain
the achievable average transmitted power to reach the required SINR only for C and X band systems
when the LEO SAR beam centre is thousands of kilometres away from GEO SAR beam centre. For the
point-like target, Doppler filtering will be an effective method to resist the LEO SAR RFI when there is
a large Doppler rate difference between GEO SAR and LEO SAR.
In the GNSS RFI case, it has very high probabilities (even 100%) of the non-specular and the
specular scattering cases due to its high orbit and the wide beam width. The required average
transmitted power is still very small in the non-specular scattering case, while an impossible average
transmitted power requirement is needed in the specular scattering case.
In the future, some RFI mitigation methods based on post signal processing are needed to address
the RFI impact, especially for the ground RFI with a very high intensity and the specular scattering
cases for the bistatic scattering RFI.

Acknowledgments: This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 61471038,
61501032, 61427802), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant no. 4162052) and Chang Jiang Scholars Program
(T2012122) and 111 project of China under Grant B14010.
Author Contributions: Y.H. Li and A. Monti Guarnieri conceived and designed the methods and wrote the paper;
Y.H. Li performed the simulation and analysed the data. F. Rocca commented about the paper and helped editing.
C. Hu gave many suggestions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A Measuring and Modelling RFI

Appendix A.1 Radio Frequency Interferences in L Band

Appendix A.1.1 SMOS Satellite RFI Data

SMOS satellite is an L band (1413.5 MHz central frequency) instrument to monitor the soil
moisture and ocean salinity [4]. Importantly, SMOS can provide the land brightness temperature file
which can be used to estimate the radiation of the RFI on the ground.
We can utilize the SMOS data to evaluate the impacts of RFI in China. The SMOS L3 products,
the RFI probability product and the Level 1C Browse product over Land (BWLD1C), are utilized [51].
In Figure A1a, RFI probability in parts of China during 15 February to 16 March 2011 shows that China
suffers high probability RFI impact. Most parts of China are interfered by the RFI (with the probability 1)
and only a small part in the north of China has a relative lower RFI probability. L1C browse products
contain brightness temperature values per pixel at a fixed incidence angle of 42.5, which are identical
to the full L1C products. The SMOS BWLD1C on 28 February 2011 is utilized in the following analysis.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 17 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 17 of 23

Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 17 of 23

Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 17 of 23

(a) (b)
Figure A1. (a) RFI probability in parts of China (15 February–16 March 2011); (b) Detected distribution
Figure A1. (a) RFI probability
(a) in parts of China (15 February–16 March (b) 2011); (b) Detected distribution
of the RFI sources based on the cluster selection.
of the RFI sources based on the cluster selection.
Figure A1. (a) RFI probability
(a) in parts of China (15 February–16 March 2011); (b) (b) Detected distribution
OnRFI
of the thesources
basis of the on
based above data, we
the cluster study the SINR. The detected distribution of the RFI sources
selection.
Figure
On based
the on
basisA1.the(a)the
of RFI probability
cluster
aboveselection
data,in parts
RFI of Chinathe
we sources
study (15 SINR.
February–16
positioning [2] March
The is given
detected 2011); (b) Detected
A1b,distribution
indistribution
Figure in
of which
the RFIwesources
have
of the
detected RFI sources
161 RFI based
sources.on the
We cluster
select selection.
the RFI sources located within the mainlobe of GEO SAR
based on Onthethe basis selection
cluster of the above RFI data, we study
sources the SINR.[2]
positioning Theisdetected
given indistribution
Figure A1b, of the
in RFI
which we and
sources have
detected obtain
based on RFI
161 the cluster
the average
sources. brightness
selection
We RFItemperature,
select sources
the RFI which is
positioning
sources 5203
[2] is K.
located Based
given in on
within themainlobe
Figure
the brightness
A1b, in whichtemperature
of we have
GEO SAR and
and
a On
2250
detected the
161wbasis of the
average
RFI sources. above
transmitted data,
We select we
thestudy
power of GEO
RFI the SINR.
SAR,
sources Thecalculated
the
located detected
within the distribution
SINR of
of the
is given
mainlobe RFISAR
in Figure
GEO sources
A2.
andThe
obtain the on
based average brightness temperature, which is 5203 K. Based on the brightness temperature
obtain thethe
maximum cluster
averageSINR selection
will be 9.5
brightness RFI
dB,sources
which positioning
temperature, suggests
which the[2]RFI
is 5203 K.isBased
given
makeon in
theFigure
the system A1b, intemperature
which we
performance
brightness have
deteriorate
and
and adetected
2250 w161 average
RFI transmitted
sources. We power
select the of
RFI GEO
sources SAR, the calculated SINR is given in Figure A2.
slightly
a 2250 (compared
w average with a 10
transmitted dB SINR
power SAR, the calculated SINR is given in Figure A2. and
requirement).
of GEO located within the mainlobe of GEO SAR The
The maximum
maximum
SINR will
obtain the average
SINR will
be 9.5 dB,
brightness
be 9.5 dB,
which suggests
temperature, whichthe
which suggests isthe
5203 RFI
RFI K.
make
Based
make
thethe system
theonsystem
performance
brightness temperature
performance
deteriorate
and
deteriorate
a 2250
slightly w
(comparedaverage withtransmitted
a 10 dB power
SINR
slightly (compared with a 10 dB SINR requirement). of GEO
requirement).SAR, the calculated SINR is given in Figure A2. The
maximum SINR will be 9.5 dB, which suggests the RFI make the system performance deteriorate
slightly (compared with a 10 dB SINR requirement).

Figure A2. GEO SAR SINR simulation based on the SMOS data (28 February 2011).

AppendixFigure
A.1.2.A2.
Beidou-2
GEO SAR IGSO
SINR Navigation Satellite
simulation based RFISMOS
on the Data data (28 February 2011).
Figure A2. GEO SAR SINR simulation based on the SMOS data (28 February 2011).
Beidou-2 IGSO navigation satellite runs in the geosynchronous orbit and works in L band. The
Figure
Appendix A.1.2. A2. GEOIGSO
Beidou-2 SAR SINR simulation
Navigation basedRFI
Satellite on the
DataSMOS data (28 February 2011).
L band receiver is set at the top of the building in Beijing Institute of Technology, China. The building
Appendix A.1.2 Beidou-2 IGSO Navigation Satellite RFI Data
isBeidou-2
marked
Appendix as the
IGSO
A.1.2. red point
navigation
Beidou-2 IGSO insatellite
Figure runs
Navigation A3. Satellite
Considering the sheltering
in the geosynchronous
RFI Data effect,
orbit and the possible
works coming
in L band. Thearea
L of
band RFIs obtained
receiver is by
set at the receiver
top of theis within
building the
in area marked
Beijing as
Institute the
of blue lines
Technology,
Beidou-2 IGSO navigation satellite runs in the geosynchronous orbit and works in L band. in Figure
China. A3.
The building
Beidou-2
is marked IGSO
as the red navigation satellite runs in the geosynchronous orbit and
the works in coming
L band. area
The
The L band receiver is point
set atin the
Figure topA3.ofConsidering
the building the sheltering
in Beijingeffect,
Institute possible
of Technology, China.
L band receiver
of RFIs obtained is set
by theat the top
receiver of
is the building
within the in Beijing
area A3.
marked Institute of Technology,
as the bluethe
lines China.
in Figure A3. The building
The building is marked as the red point in Figure Considering sheltering
is marked as the red point in Figure A3. Considering the sheltering effect, the possible coming area effect, the possible
coming areaobtained
of RFIs of RFIs obtained by the
by the receiver receiver
is within theisarea
within
markedthe asarea
themarked
blue linesasinthe blueA3.
Figure lines in Figure A3.

Figure A3. Possible coming area of RFI.

Figure A3. Possible coming area of RFI.

Figure A3. Possible coming area of RFI.

Figure A3. Possible coming area of RFI.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 18 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 18 of 23

We obtain the Beidou-2 IGSO navigation satellite from the No.2 IGSO satellite. When there is no
RFI, the We
received
obtain signal is shown
the Beidou-2 IGSOinnavigation
Figure A4a. The corresponding
satellite from the No.2 IGSOspectrum is shown
satellite. in Figure
When there is no A4b.
In the absence of RFI, the signal is random, deriving from thermal noise. In Figure A4c,d,A4b.
RFI, the received signal is shown in Figure A4a. The corresponding spectrum is shown in Figure it shows
the In
RFIthesignal
absence of RFI,
in time thefrequency
and signal is random, deriving
domains, from thermal
respectively. noise. Inperiodic
An obvious Figure A4c,d, it showsin the
RFI emerges
the RFI
figure. Thesignal in time
detected RFI and frequency
is a kind domains,
of pulse respectively.
interference. An obvious
Its pulse width isperiodic
about 100RFIus
emerges
and the in pulse
the figure. The detected RFI is a kind of pulse interference. Its pulse width is about 100 us and the
repeated frequency is nearly 900 Hz. The bandwidth of the RFI is about 4 MHz (wide spectrum part
pulse repeated frequency is nearly 900 Hz. The bandwidth of the RFI is about 4 MHz (wide spectrum
in Figure A4d). The equivalent antenna temperature is about 1573 K. There are some other high
part in Figure A4d). The equivalent antenna temperature is about 1573 K. There are some other high
amplitude RFI signals existing in the spectrum (e.g., 100 Hz bandwidth). However, as their
amplitude RFI signals existing in the spectrum (e.g., 100 Hz bandwidth). However, as their bandwidths
bandwidths are very
are very small, theirsmall,
energiestheir
are energies are small
small compared withcompared with the noise floor.
the noise floor.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure A4.A4.
Figure Beidou-2
Beidou-2IGSO
IGSOnavigation satellitesignal
navigation satellite signalanalysis.
analysis.(a)(a) signal
signal without
without RFI RFI in time
in time domain;
domain;
(b) (b)
signal
signal without RFI in frequency domain; (c) signal with RFI in time domain; (d) signal with RFI inRFI in
without RFI in frequency domain; (c) signal with RFI in time domain; (d) signal with
frequency domain.
frequency domain.

If we add
If we addthethedetected
detectedRFI
RFI ofof Beidou-2 IGSOnavigation
Beidou-2 IGSO navigation satellite
satellite datadata
intointo the GEO
the GEO SAR case
SAR case
with a 2250
with ww
a 2250 average
averagetransmitted
transmitted power, theSINR
power, the SINRininthethe presence
presence of the
of the RFIRFI is shown
is shown in Figure
in Figure A5. A5.
TheThe
maximum
maximumSINRSINRis is about 15.7dB,
about 15.7 dB, which
which shows
shows littlelittle
impactimpact
on GEO onSAR
GEO SAR imaging
imaging (compared(compared
with
a 10
with dBdB
a 10 SINR
SINRrequirement).
requirement).
 Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 19 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 19 of 23

Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 19 of 23

Figure A5. A5.

Figure GEO
Figure A5.
SAR
GEO SINR
GEO SAR
based
SAR SINR
SINR based
on
based on
the
on the
Beidou-2
the Beidou-2
IGSOnavigation
Beidou-2 IGSO
navigation
IGSO navigation
satellite
satellite data.
satellite data.
data.

Appendix A.2. A.2

Appendix
Appendix Radio
A.2. Frequency
Radio
Radio Interferences
Frequency
Frequency Interferencesin
Interferences ininCCBand
Band
Band
The analyses
The analyses of RFI
of RFI in C
RFI in CC band
in bandband have
havehavebeenbeen carried
carried out
beencarried out by byexploiting
by exploitingSentinel-1
exploiting Sentinel-1
Sentinel-1 data
data according
data according
according to
to to
the
the procedure
procedure
the procedure described
described
described inin[12].
in[12].
[12].The
TheThe procedure
procedure
procedure isisis
general
general
general and cancan
and
and be be
can applied
beapplied worldwide,
applied worldwide,
worldwide,thanksthanksto the
to to
thanks
systematic
the systematic acquisition
acquisitionof S1.
of The
S1. Theevaluation
evaluation of RFI
of RFIEIRP
EIRP transmitted
transmitted
the systematic acquisition of S1. The evaluation of RFI EIRP transmitted in the direction of the satellite in inthe
the direction
direction ofof the
the satellite
satellite
has been achieved by averaging RFI over a time interval of 10 pulses
has been been achieved
achieved by averaging RFI over a time interval of 10pulses pulses(6 ms)
(6(6ms)
ms) each
each
each20
20 20km.
km.km.
◦
S1 receiver
receiver
S1 receiver
bandwidth
bandwidth is is 40–70
40–70 MHz,
MHz, depending
depending on on the
the swath
swath and and thethe thermal
thermal noise
noise is is about
about800800 °K. K.
bandwidth is 40–70 MHz, depending on the swath and the thermal noise is about 800 °K.
As
As example
exampleofofdetection
detectionofofRFI,RFI, achieved
achieved byby processing
processing 400400
datasets,
datasets,eacheachof them spanning
of them spanning an areaan
As example of detection of RFI, achieved by processing 400 datasets, each of them spanning an
area×250
250 250× km
250 wide
km wideand and
acquired in 2016–2017
acquired in 2016–2017 is shown in Figure
is shown A6. In
in Figure A6. the
Infigure, all the
the figure, alldetected
the detected RFI,
area 250 × 250half
affecting kmof wide and acquired
the datasets, in 2016–2017
are stacked. The vertical is shown is in
theFigure A6. In the figure, all the detected
RFI, affecting half of the datasets, are stacked. Theaxis
vertical received
axis is thepower
receivedspectrum,
powernormalized
spectrum,
RFI, to
affecting
S1 noisehalf
normalized floor.
to S1 ofThethespectra
noise datasets,show
floor. The aremany
spectrastacked.
distributed
show The vertical
many sources and
distributed axissources
aisfew,
thestrong
received
and power
RFI. strong
a few, An spectrum,
evaluation
RFI. An
normalized
of to S1 noise
the RFI probability
evaluation floor. The spectra
of power distribution
of the RFI probability show many
with frequency
of power distribution distributed
withisfrequency sources
in FigureisA7. and
in In a few,
the figure
Figure strong
A7. Inon thethe RFI.
left, An
figure
evaluation
each
on the of the
column
left, eachisRFI
an probability
estimate
column of cumulated
ofestimate
is an the power distribution
of the with
density of density
cumulated frequency
probability (CDF)isthat
of probability in(CDF)
Figure
RFI exceedsA7.
that RFIIn the figure
aexceeds
certain
power
on thea left, threshold.
each
certain powercolumn Notice that in
is an estimate
threshold. most
Notice that of
of the the cases,
cumulated
in most this probability
density
of the cases, thisof of exceeding
probability
probability a value of
(CDF) thata RFI
of exceeding around
value 3,
exceeds
of
that roughly corresponds ◦
to 2400 thatK,toisinless than
around
a certain 3, that
power roughly corresponds
threshold. Notice 2400
most °K,of is1/100.
less
the thanIn the
cases, same
1/100.
this In figure,
the same
probability on the ofright,
figure, onthe
exceedingthemean
right, and
the of
a value
the
aroundmeanstandard
and the
3, that deviations
roughlystandard are plotted
deviationsto
corresponds for
are2400 the
plottedRFI
°K,for stacked
the RFI
is less thanin Figure
stacked A6 and
1/100.inInFigure accounting
the same A6 and for
accounting
figure, the
on theforcases in the
the
right,
meanwhich
cases
and in nowhich
the RFI was
standard nodetected.
RFI Here again,
was detected.
deviations Here
are plottedoneagain,
can assume
for the oneRFIcanthat the RFIthat
assume
stacked inlevelthedoes
Figure RFIA6not exceeds
level
and does a threshold
not
accounting exceedsfor the
of 2400 ◦ K. However,
a threshold of 2400 °K.this holds only
However, by assuming
this holds only by randomassuming distributed RFI and not—for
random distributed RFI andexample,not – for
cases in which no RFI was detected. Here again, one can assume that the RFI level does not exceeds
for the very
example, forstrong
the very values
strongobserved
values in some specific
observed in some geographic locations. locations.
specific geographic
a threshold of 2400 °K. However, this holds only by assuming random distributed RFI and not – for
example, for the very strong values observed in some specific geographic locations.

Figure A6.
Figure A6. Stacking
Stacking of
of all
all the
the RFI
RFI power
power spectra
spectra evaluated
evaluated in
in Europe
Europe by
by Sentinel-1.
Sentinel-1. Vertical
Vertical axis
axis is
is
power,normalized
power, normalizedtotoSentinel-1
Sentinel-1noise
noisepower
powerspectrum.
spectrum.

Figure A6. Stacking of all the RFI power spectra evaluated in Europe by Sentinel-1. Vertical axis is
power, normalized to Sentinel-1 noise power spectrum.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 20 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 20 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 20 of 23

Figure
Figure A7.
A7. Left:
Left: cumulated
cumulatedhistograms
histograms (right)
(right)of
ofRFI
RFIpower
powerdistributions
distributionswith
withfrequency,
frequency, normalized
normalized
Figure
to S1 A7. Left:
noise, cumulated
estimated by histograms
processing (right)
data from of RFI powerVertical
all-Europe. distributions
scale with
is frequency,
probability normalized
in log10.
to S1 noise, estimated by processing data from all-Europe. Vertical scale is probability in Right:
log10.
to S1 noise,
Plots of estimated
average by and
(above) processing data
standard from all-Europe.
deviation (below) ofVertical
the RFI scale
mean is normalized
probability in log10.
power Right:
for each
Right: Plots of average (above) and standard deviation (below) of the RFI mean normalized power for
Plots of
frequencyaverage
bin. (above) and standard deviation (below) of the RFI mean normalized power for each
each frequency bin.
frequency bin.
The case of point-like RFI needs different analyses. Several repeated acquisitions centred in
The case
The case of point-like RFI needs different analyses. SeveralSeveral repeated
repeated acquisitions
acquisitions centred
centred in in
location in Middle East where the strongest RFI are measured, have been exploited leading to the
location
location in Middle East where the strongest RFI are measured, have been exploited leading to the
PDF andin Middle
CDF shownEast where A8.
in Figure the The
strongest RFI are
plots show measured,
that have
strong RFI beensystematically
repeats exploited leading
in thetosame
the
PDF and
PDF and CDF
CDF shown
shown inin Figure
Figure A8.
A8. The
The plots
plotsshow
show that
thatstrong
strong RFI
RFI repeats
repeats systematically
systematically in
in the
the same
same
bandwidth, that is however only a portion of the entire spectrum available. This suggests mitigation
bandwidth, that is
bandwidth, is however
however only
only aa portion
portion of
of the
the entire
entire spectrum available. This
This suggests
suggests mitigation
mitigation
with an agilethat
frequency allocation.
with
with an agile frequency allocation.

Figure A8. Histograms (left) and cumulated histograms (right) of RFI power distributions with
Figure
Figure A8. Histograms
Histograms
A8.normalized
frequency, to(left)
(left)
S1 and
noiseand cumulated
cumulated
estimated histograms (right)
histogramsdata
by processing (right) of
of RFI
coming RFI
frompower
power distributions
distributions
the highest with
with
RFI in Figure
frequency,
frequency,
A6 normalized
averagednormalized to S1 noise
in differenttotimes.
S1 noise estimated by
estimated
Vertical processing
scale is by data
processing
probability coming from
data coming
in log10 the
(left) andfrom highest RFI
the(right).
linear in Figure
highest RFI in
A6 averaged
Figure in different
A6 averaged times. Vertical
in different scale isscale
times. Vertical probability in log10in(left)
is probability log10and linear
(left) and(right).
linear (right).
To evaluate the RFI impact in C band GEO SAR with a 2250 w average transmitted power, we
To
utilize evaluate the RFI impactBased
in C band theGEO SAR with adata
2250inwBeijing
average transmitted power, we
Tothe Sentinel-1
evaluate the RFI
RFI data.
impact in Conband Sentinel-1
GEO SARRFI with a 2250 area,
w average we integrate
transmitted the RFI
power,
utilize
energy the Sentinel-1
within RFI
the 400 km data. Based
swath on the Sentinel-1 RFI data in Beijing area, we integrate the RFI
we utilize the Sentinel-1 RFI data.inBased
the GEO
on theSAR case. According
Sentinel-1 RFI data to in the previous
Beijing analysis,
area, we the
integrate
energy within
equivalent the 400
antenna km swath
temperature is in the2400
about GEO K SAR case.
(total energyAccording
received to the
by theantenna).
previousThe analysis,
GEO the
SAR
the RFI energy within the 400 km swath in the GEO SAR case. According to the previous analysis,
equivalent
SINR map antenna
by using temperature
thetemperature
Sentinel-1is about
data 2400
is K (total energy
given received by the antenna). isThe GEO SAR
the equivalent antenna is about 2400inKFigure A9. The
(total energy maximum
received SINR
by the more
antenna). than
The GEO24
SINR
dB. map
Under by
theusing the
proposed Sentinel-1
case, the data
impactis given
of the in
C Figure
band A9.
RFI The
has maximum
no impact SINR
on GEO is more
SAR than
imaging24
SAR SINR map by using the Sentinel-1 data is given in Figure A9. The maximum SINR is more than
dB. Under the
(compared withproposed case, requirement).
the impact of the C band RFI has no impact on GEO SAR imaging
24 dB. Under thea proposed
10 dB SINR case, the impact of the C band RFI has no impact on GEO SAR imaging
(compared with a 10 dB SINR requirement).
(compared with a 10 dB SINR requirement).
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 21 of 23
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 21 of 23

Figure
Figure A9.
A9. GEO
GEOSAR
SARSINR
SINR based
based on
on Sentinel-1
Sentinel-1 data.
data.

References
References
1. Ulaby, F.; Avery, S. A Strategy for Active Remote Sensing Amid Increased Demand for Radio Spectrum; The
1. Ulaby, F.; Avery, S. A Strategy for Active Remote Sensing Amid Increased Demand for Radio Spectrum;
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicines, Ed.; The National Academies Press:
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicines, Ed.; The National Academies Press:
Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
2. Oliva, R.; Nieto, S.; Félix-Redondo, F. RFI Detection Algorithm: Accurate Geolocation of the Interfering
2. Oliva, R.; Nieto, S.; Félix-Redondo, F. RFI Detection Algorithm: Accurate Geolocation of the Interfering
Sources in SMOS Images. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51, 4993–4998.
Sources in SMOS Images. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51, 4993–4998. [CrossRef]
3. Freeman, A.P.; Fischman, M.A.; McWatters, D.A.; Spencer, M.W.; Piepmeier, J.R. The Detection and
3. Freeman, A.P.; Fischman, M.A.; McWatters, D.A.; Spencer, M.W.; Piepmeier, J.R. The Detection and Mitigation
Mitigation of RFI with the Aquarius L-Band Scatterometer. In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Boston,
of RFI with the Aquarius L-Band Scatterometer. In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Boston, MA, USA,
MA, USA, 7–11 July 2008.
7–11 July 2008.
4. Oliva, R.; Daganzo, E.; Kerr, Y.H.; Mecklenburg, S.; Nieto, S.; Richaume, P.; Gruhier, C. SMOS radio
4. Oliva, R.; Daganzo, E.; Kerr, Y.H.; Mecklenburg, S.; Nieto, S.; Richaume, P.; Gruhier, C. SMOS radio frequency
frequency interference scenario: Status and actions taken to improve the RFI environment in the 1400–1427-
interference scenario: Status and actions taken to improve the RFI environment in the 1400–1427-MHz
MHz passive band. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2012, 50, 1427–1439.
passive band. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2012, 50, 1427–1439. [CrossRef]
5. Pascual, D.; Park, H.; Onrubia, R.; Arroyo, A.A.; Querol, J.; Camps, A. Crosstalk Statistics and Impact in
5. Pascual, D.; Park, H.; Onrubia, R.; Arroyo, A.A.; Querol, J.; Camps, A. Crosstalk Statistics and Impact in
Interferometric GNSS-R. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2016, 9, 4621–4630.
Interferometric GNSS-R. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Appl. Earth Obs. Remote Sens. 2016, 9, 4621–4630. [CrossRef]
6. Musumeci, L. Advanced Signal Processing Techniques for Interference Removal in Satellite Navigation
6. Musumeci, L. Advanced Signal Processing Techniques for Interference Removal in Satellite Navigation
Systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy, 2014.
Systems. Ph.D. Thesis, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy, 2014.
7. Yang, L.; Zheng, H.F.; Feng, J.; Li, M.; Chen, J.Q. Detection and suppression of narrow band RFI for
7. Yang, L.; Zheng, H.F.; Feng, J.; Li, M.; Chen, J.Q. Detection and suppression of narrow band RFI for synthetic
synthetic aperture radar imaging. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2015, 28, 1189–1198.
aperture radar imaging. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2015, 28, 1189–1198. [CrossRef]
8. Meyer, F.J.; Nicoll, J.B.; Doulgeris, A.P. Correction and Characterization of Radio Frequency Interference
8. Meyer, F.J.; Nicoll, J.B.; Doulgeris, A.P. Correction and Characterization of Radio Frequency Interference
Signatures in L-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar Data. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51, 4961–4972.
Signatures in L-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar Data. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51, 4961–4972.
9. Brandao, A.L.; Sydor, J. 5 GHz RLAN Interference on active meteorological radars. In Proceedings of the
[CrossRef]
2005 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 30 May–1 June 2005.
9. Brandao, A.L.; Sydor, J. 5 GHz RLAN Interference on active meteorological radars. In Proceedings of the
10. Tercero, M.; Sung, K.W.; Zander, J. Impact of aggregate interference on meteorological radar from
2005 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Stockholm, Sweden, 30 May–1 June 2005.
secondary users. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference,
10. Tercero, M.; Sung, K.W.; Zander, J. Impact of aggregate interference on meteorological radar from
Cancun, Mexico, 28–31 March 2011; pp. 2167–2172.
secondary users. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference,
11. Meadows, P. Sentinel-1A and -1B Annual Performance Report 2016; MPC-0366; Collecte Localisation Satellite:
Cancun, Mexico, 28–31 March 2011; pp. 2167–2172.
Ramonville Saint-Agne, France, 2016.
11. Meadows, P. Sentinel-1A and -1B Annual Performance Report 2016; MPC-0366; Collecte Localisation Satellite:
12. Monti-Guarnieri, A.; Giudici, D.; Recchia, A. Identification of C-Band Radio Frequency Interferences from
Ramonville Saint-Agne, France, 2016.
Sentinel-1 Data. Remote Sens. 2017, 9, 1183.
12. Monti-Guarnieri, A.; Giudici, D.; Recchia, A. Identification of C-Band Radio Frequency Interferences from
13. John, J.T.; Chen, C.C.; O'Brien, A.; Smith, G.E.; McKelvey, C.; Ball, M.A.C.; Misra, S.; Brown, S.; Kocz, J.;
Sentinel-1 Data. Remote Sens. 2017, 9, 1183. [CrossRef]
Jarnot, R. The CubeSat Radiometer Radio Frequency Interference Technology Validation (CubeRRT)
13. John, J.T.; Chen, C.C.; O’Brien, A.; Smith, G.E.; McKelvey, C.; Ball, M.A.C.; Misra, S.; Brown, S.; Kocz, J.;
mission. In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Beijing China, 10–15 July 2016.
Jarnot, R. The CubeSat Radiometer Radio Frequency Interference Technology Validation (CubeRRT) mission.
14. Ellingson, S.W.; Johnson, J.T. A polarimetric survey of radio-frequency interference in C- and X-bands in
In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Beijing China, 10–15 July 2016.
the continental United States using WindSat radiometry. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2006, 44, 540–548.
14. Ellingson, S.W.; Johnson, J.T. A polarimetric survey of radio-frequency interference in C- and X-bands in
15. Hamdadou, N.; Chen, J.; Kamel, H.; Hui, K. Bidirectional notch filter for suppressing pulse modulated
the continental United States using WindSat radiometry. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2006, 44, 540–548.
radio-frequency-interference in SAR data. In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Quebec, QC, Canada, 13–18
[CrossRef]
July 2014.
16. Tomiyasu, K. Synthetic aperture radar in geosynchronous orbit. In Proceedings of the Digest International
IEEE Antennas Propagation Symposium, College Park, MD, USA, 15–19 March 1978.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 22 of 23

15. Hamdadou, N.; Chen, J.; Kamel, H.; Hui, K. Bidirectional notch filter for suppressing pulse modulated
radio-frequency-interference in SAR data. In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Quebec, QC, Canada,
13–18 July 2014.
16. Tomiyasu, K. Synthetic aperture radar in geosynchronous orbit. In Proceedings of the Digest International
IEEE Antennas Propagation Symposium, College Park, MD, USA, 15–19 March 1978.
17. Madsen, S.N.; Edelstein, W.; Didomenico, L.D.; LaBrecque, J. A geosynchronous synthetic aperture
radar; for tectonic mapping, disaster management and measurement of vegetation and soil moisture.
In Proceedings of the IEEE IGARSS, Sydney, Australia, 9–13 July 2001.
18. Hobbs, S.; Mitchell, C.; Forte, B.; Holley, R.; Snapir, B.; Whittaker, P. System design for geosynchronous
synthetic aperture radar missions. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2014, 52, 7750–7763. [CrossRef]
19. Bruno, D.; Hobbs, S.E.; Ottavianelli, G. Geosynchronous synthetic aperture radar: Concept design, properties
and possible applications. Acta Aston. 2006, 59, 149–156. [CrossRef]
20. Monti Guarnieri, A.; Hu, C. Geosynchronous and geostationary SAR: Face to face comparison. In Proceedings of
the EUSAR, Hamburg, Germany, 6–9 June 2016.
21. Hu, C.; Li, Y.H.; Dong, X.C.; Long, T. Optimal data acquisition and height retrieval in repeat-track
geosynchronous SAR interferometry. Remote Sens. 2015, 7, 13367–13389. [CrossRef]
22. Hu, C.; Li, Y.H.; Dong, X.C.; Cui, C.; Long, T. Impacts of temporal-spatial variant background ionosphere on
repeat-track GEO D-InSAR system. Remote Sens. 2016, 8, 916. [CrossRef]
23. Hu, C.; Li, Y.H.; Dong, X.C.; Wang, R.; Ao, D.Y. Performance Analysis of L-band Geosynchronous SAR
Imaging in the Presence of Ionospheric Scintillation. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2017, 55, 159–172.
[CrossRef]
24. Hu, C.; Li, Y.H.; Dong, X.C.; Wang, R.; Cui, C.; Zhang, B. Three-Dimensional Deformation Retrieval in
Geosynchronous SAR by Multiple-Aperture Interferometry Processing: Theory and Performance Analysis.
IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2017, 55, 6150–6169. [CrossRef]
25. Recchia, A.; Monti Guarnieri, A.; Broquetas, A.; Leanza, A. Impact of scene decorrelation on geosynchronous
SAR data focusing. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2016, 54, 1635–1646. [CrossRef]
26. Hu, B.; Jiang, Y.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, Y.; Yeo, T. Generalized omega-K algorithm for geosynchronous SAR
image formation. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2015, 12, 2286–2290. [CrossRef]
27. Wang, C.; Chen, L.; Liu, L. A New Analytical Model to Study the Ionospheric Effects on VHF/UHF Wideband
SAR Imaging. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2017, 55, 4545–4557. [CrossRef]
28. Wang, C.; Zhang, M.; Xu, Z.W.; Chen, C.; Guo, L.X. Cubic phase distortion and irregular degradation on
SAR imaging due to the ionosphere. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2015, 53, 3442–3451. [CrossRef]
29. Monti-Guarnieri, A.; Broquetas, A.; Recchia, A.; Rocca, F.; Ruiz-Rodon, J. Advanced radar geosynchronous
observation system: ARGOS. IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett. 2015, 12, 1406–1410. [CrossRef]
30. Ruiz-Rodon, J.; Broquetas, A.; Makhoul, E.; Monti-Guarnieri, A.; Rocca, F. Geosynchronous SAR focusing
with atmospheric phase screen retrieval and compensation. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51,
4397–4404. [CrossRef]
31. SMOS Blog. Available online: http://www.cesbio.ups-tlse.fr/SMOS_blog/smos_rfi/?q=image/12894-
proba-rfi-d-20170826-20170909-bb (accessed on 15 September 2017).
32. Curlander, J.C.; McDonough, R.N. Synthetic Aperture Radar: Systems and Signal Processing; Wiley:
New York, NY, USA, 1991.
33. Meyer, F.J.; Nicoll, J.; Doulgeris, A.P. Characterization and extent of randomly-changing radio frequency
interference in ALOS PALSAR data. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Geoscience and Remote
Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), Vancouver, BC, Canada, 24–29 July 2011.
34. Ferretti, A.; MontiGuarnieri, A.; Prati, C.; Rocca, F.; Massonnet, D. SAR Principles: Guideline for SAR
Interferometry Processing and Interpretation; ESA: Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 2007; pp. 57–71.
35. Rosen, P.A.; Hensley, S.; Le, C. Observations and mitigation of RFI in ALOS PALSAR SAR data: Implications
for the DESDynI mission. In Proceedings of the IEEE Radar Conference, Rome, Italy, 26–30 May 2008.
36. Kankaku, Y.; Osawa, Y.; Suzuki, S.; Watanabe, T. The Overview of the L-band SAR Onboard ALOS-2.
In Proceedings of the Electromagnetics Research Symposium, Moscow, Russia, 18–21 August 2009.
37. Huang, S.W.; Tsang, L.G. Bistatic scattering, backscattering and emissivities of randomly rough soil surfaces
at L band based on numerical solutions of Maxwell equations of 3 Dimensional simulations. In Proceedings
of the IEEE IGARSS, Honolulu, HI, USA, 25–30 July 2010.
Remote Sens. 2018, 10, 82 23 of 23

38. Willis, N.J. Bistatic radar, chapter 25. In Radar Handbook, 2nd ed.; Skolnik, M.I., Ed.; McGraw-Hill Education:
New York, NY, USA, 1990.
39. Skolnik, M. Introduction to Radar Systems; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
40. ESA Sentinel-1. Available online: https://sentinel.esa.int/documents/247904/349449/S1_SP-1322_1.pdf
(accessed on 8 September 2017).
41. EoPortal Directory. Available online: https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/a/alos-2
(accessed on 8 September 2017).
42. Microwave Radar and Radiometric Remote Sensing. Available online: http://mrs.eecs.umich.edu/sensors.html
(accessed on 8 September 2017).
43. Bordoni, F.; Younis, M.; Rodriguez-Cassola, M.; Prats-Iraola, P.; López-Dekker, P.; Krieger, G. SAOCOM-CS
SAR imaging performance evaluation in large baseline bistatic configuration. In Proceedings of the IEEE
IGARSS, Milan, Italy, 26–31 July 2015.
44. EoPortal Directory. Available online: https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/r/radarsat-2
(accessed on 8 September 2017).
45. DLR. Available online: http://www.dlr.de/hr/Portaldata/32/Resources/dokumente/tdmx/Tandem-X-
RADAR-2004.pdf (accessed on 8 September 2017).
46. GPS Information. Available online: http://gpsinformation.net/main/gpspower.htm (accessed on 8 September 2017).
47. Wikipedia. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GLONASS (accessed on 8 September 2017).
48. European GNSS Agency. Available online: https://www.gsa.europa.eu/galileo/programme (accessed on
8 September 2017).
49. WEEBAU. Available online: http://weebau.com/satellite/B/beidou2.htm (accessed on 8 September 2017).
50. Steigenberger, P.; Thoelert, S.; Montenbruck, O. GNSS satellite transmit power and its impact on orbit
Determination. J. Geod. 2017. [CrossRef]
51. SMOS Blog. Available online: http://www.cesbio.ups-tlse.fr/SMOS_blog/?page_id=4087 (accessed on
8 September 2017).

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).