Slow-Moving Micro-UAV detection with a small
scale Digital Array Radar
Abdulrazaq Aldowesh Tareq Alnuaim
Prince Sultan Defence Studies Prince Sultan Defence Studies
and Research Center and Research Center
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Email: dh 000@hotmail.com Email: tareq.n2@hotmail.com
Abstract—The detection of slow-moving and small Radar Cross
Section (RCS) micro-Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) can be
challenging. Typically, radar returns from such targets are very
low in magnitude, buried in close to carrier phase noise and
background clutter. Digital Array Radar (DAR) architecture
enables various array processing methods that can improve the
capability of a radar. For instance, Digital Beamforming (DBF)
techniques are applied in DAR to improve the search ability
of the system. Multiple surveillance beams can be synthesized
concurrently to cover a wide search volume, enabling DAR to
virtually stare at targets for much longer intervals compared
to beam scanning radars. Consequently, Doppler resolution
of the radar is improved significantly, allowing for enhanced
discrimination of slow targets from stationary clutter. This paper
illustrates the development and experimentation of a small scale
DAR prototype, operating in S band, applied to detect a slow
moving micro-UAV target at a relatively long range.
Index Terms—Digital Array Radar, micro-UAV, Software De-
fined Radar, Digital Beamforming, Doppler Processing, Drone
Detection.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Recent progress in the development of micro-UAVs has
made them more affordable and easily procurable for the
average consumer. Commercial drones are being used in sev-
eral applications and industries such as: inspections, delivery,
filming, etc. However, micro-UAVs pose a serious threat to
security-sensitive facilities and infrastructures. They can be
equipped with several sensors (e.g. cameras and microphones)
and be utilized for spying purposes, or potentially be exploited
in disruption and sabotage activities (e.g flying drones near
airport runways to disrupt air-traffic). Radar systems are em-
ployed to detect such threats, due to their ability to provide
early warning and all-weather operation capability [1], [3], and
[10]. Digital array radars have the potential for improved de-
tection performance of slow-moving and small RCS targets. In
these systems, every element in the transmit-array is preceded
by a Digital to Analog Converter (DAC), and every element in
the receive-array is followed by an Analog to Digital Converter
(ADC), allowing for a great deal of operational flexibility
compared to their analog counterpart. For instance, DAR
system can employ techniques like transmit beam-spoiling and
DBF on receive, permitting long integration-time on targets for
finer Doppler resolution, whilst maintaining adequate search
978-1-7281-1679-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Science & Technology Development Agency. Downloaded on May 08,2023 at 02:37:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Adel Alzogaiby
Prince Sultan Defence Studies
and Research Center
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Email: adel.alzogaiby@psdsarc.org
update rate. Furthermore, DAR offers hardware advantages for
detecting small targets in heavy-clutter environments in terms
of relaxed receiver dynamic range requirements, enhanced
phase-noise and spurs performance [11], [12]. In this paper,
we demonstrate a small scale DAR capable of detecting a
slow-moving and small RCS drone at a relatively long range.
In section II, description of the developed radar is presented.
Section III illustrates experimental results obtained with the
developed system against a micro-UAV.
II. S YSTEM D ESCRIPTION
A. Radar Prototype Description
Throughout our development of DAR prototype, Commer-
cial of the Shelf (COTS) components were leveraged as
building blocks for the radar hardware. The receiver array was
built by utilizing Software-Defined Radio (SDR) receivers (NI
PXIe 5663), synchronized by sharing a Local-Oscillator (LO)
between the receivers front-end, and sharing a reference Clock
source between the digitizers. Similarly, the transmitter is a
COTS SDR module (NI PXIe 5673). For transmitter-receiver
synchronization, a reference clock source is shared between
the transmitter and the receiver array. Signal conditioning
components were added to the system, such as Low-Noise
Amplifiers (LNAs), and Power Amplifier (PA). The LNAs
were placed immediately after the receiving antennas, to
reduce the overall receiver Noise Figure and enhance the radar
sensitivity. In the transmit side, the PA was placed before
the transmit antenna, to amplify the generated waveform and
transmit adequate RF power for improved target detection.
RF-switching circuit was added before the receive array for
internal array calibration. The calibration is performed by
injecting RF signal internally to measure channel-to-channel
amplitude and phase differences, and calibrate the array during
radar operation. DAR signal processing is divided among two
processing platforms, a multi-core Central Processing Unit
(CPU) and a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). The
CPU was used for overall system control, and low data-rate
radar processing functions. The FPGA was mainly utilized for
high-throughput signal processing in the receiver side, refer to
Fig. 1. for system block diagram.
 Fig. 1. DAR Prototype Block Diagram.

B. DAR Signal Processing function, by time-reversing and complex-conjugating the radar

1) Waveform Generation: Starting with the transmitter side,
radar digital waveform is designed and generated with flexible
modulations using the Radar Waveform Generation function
inside the CPU. The digital samples of the designed waveform
are fed to the DAC for waveform synthesis. The same function
that generates the digital waveform also produces the receiver
Matched Filter coefficients, and these coefficients are uploaded
directly to the FPGA during runtime. For instance, the classical
Linear Frequency Modulated (LFM) waveform samples are
generated by (1)[8]:
waveform samples x[n], as shown in (2)[8]:
h[n] = x⇤ [ n] (2)
The matched filtering operation is performed by convolving
of the received signal r[n] with the filter coefficients h[n] (3).
y[n] = r[n] ⇤ h[n] (3)
The computation of this operation is significantly simplified
in the FPGA implementation, by fast convolution in frequency
domain with the use of Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) (4)[8].
y[n] = IF F T {F F T {r[n]}F F T {h[n]}} (4)

B 2
h N i
⌧
hN i
⌧
The MF operation was implemented in the FPGA side of
x[n] = Aej⇡ fs N⌧ n , n = , ..., 0, ..., (1) the radar processor. The FPGA used in the system is NI’s
2 2
FlexRIO 7965R, a Xilinx’s Virtex-5 SX95T FPGA. Table
I shows the MF code compilation summary report of the
where x[n] denotes the nth waveform sample, A is the device utilization.
waveform magnitude, B is the waveform bandwidth, fs is the
waveform sampling rate, and N⌧ is the number of samples 3) Digital Beamforming: DBF is performed after the
corresponding to waveform duration ⌧ . matched filtering operation, by multiplying the digital array
samples with beamforming coefficients, and summing the
2) Radar Matched Filtering: Once the received signals are output to produce the desired beam, as shown in (5)[9]:
digitized, the received samples are fed to the FPGA to per-
M
X1
form radar Matched Filtering (MF). This function is typically ⇤
performed at a high data-rate (four MFs are implemented y= wm rm (5)
m=0
in parallel for the four-channel array). The matched filter
coefficients are computed in the Radar Waveform Generation w m = am ej m
, m = 0, 1, ..., M 1 (6)

978-1-7281-1679-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Science & Technology Development Agency. Downloaded on May 08,2023 at 02:37:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 TABLE I
D EVICE U TILIZATION S UMMAY R EPORT
Total Slices 93.4% (13754 out of 14720)
Slice Registers 54.7% (32202 out of 58880)
Slice LUTs 75.7% (44577 out of 58880)
Block RAMs 45.1% (110 out of 244)
DSP48s 52.5% (336 out of 640)
Fig. 2. OS-CFAR Algorithm.
Where rm is the received sample from the mth antenna
element in the array, wm is the mth beamforming coefficient,
y is the signal produced by the DBF operation, and M is the
total number of antenna array elements.
4) Target Detection: Target detection is performed by com-
paring the magnitude of each processed sample to a threshold.
The threshold for different samples will vary according to the
estimate of disturbance and noise near a particular sample, in
order to maintain a constant false alarm rate. The Constant
false alarm rate (CFAR) algorithm of choice was the Order
Statistic OS-CFAR [6] and [7], for its robustness against
interfering peaks on the cell under test (CUT). Fig. 2 shows
the algorithm we used for implementing the OS-CFAR. Cells
before and after the CUT are utilized to estimate the noise
floor level around the CUT, by arranging them in ascending
order in terms of their amplitude value, and taking only the
k th sample to compute the threshold for a specific probability
of false alarm (PF A ). Guard cells before and after the CUT
are needed in case the energy of the CUT is dispersed onto
adjacent cells. The threshold for determining whether a target
exists in the CUT is computed for a specific PF A using (7)
[7]:
N !(↵OS + N k)!
PF A =
(N k)!(↵OS + N )!
where ↵OS is the OS scaling factor, k is the representative
sample rank, and N is the total number of background
samples.
978-1-7281-1679-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Science & Technology Development Agency. Downloaded on May 08,2023 at 02:37:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 3. DJI Mavic Pro micro-UAV.
Fig. 4. Mavic Pro RCS simulation at L, S, and X bands.
C. Target RCS Analysis (DJI Mavic Pro)
Several RCS measurements were conducted for different
micro-UAVs [4, 5]. However, micro-UAV manufacturers are
continuously miniaturizing the physical dimensions of their
drones. The test-target of this experiment is a Mavic pro drone
manufactured by Dajiang Innovation Technology Co., Ltd.
(DJI). It has a diagonal size of 33.5 cm and width of 27.5
cm as shown in Fig. 3.
Monostatic RCS Simulations were carried out by FEKO
simulator engine, using a hybrid computational technique
based on Method of Moments (MoM) and Physical Optics
(PO). The results shown in Fig. 4 are the RCS simulation
of Mavic Pro in three different frequency bands: L, S and X
bands, with a Vertical-Vertical (VV) polarization setting. The
overall body of the drone was modeled as plastic material,
except for the drone’s battery pack and rotors, which were
modeled as a highly conductive material. The averaged RCS
simulation results for the stated frequency-bands are -19.07
dBsm, -14.42 dBsm, and -17.10 dBsm respectively. The moti-
vation behind this simulation is to obtain an estimate of Mavic
Pro drone RCS, and this estimated value is used to predict the
designed radar range performance.
(7)
D. Radar Link-Budget Analysis
Radar detection performance is predicted by using the Radar
Range Equation (8)[8]:
 TABLE II
S YSTEM PARAMETERS F OR L INK B UDGET C ALCULATION

Transmit Power Pt 20 Watt

Transmit antenna gain 15 dBi
Receive antenna gain 7 dBi
Radar Center Frequency 2.4 GHz
Minimum Detectable Receive Power -130 dBm
Target RCS 0.03 m2
Maximum Detection Range (calculated) 1681 m

Fig. 6. DAR Receiver and transmitter antennas.

Fig. 5. Measurements site and Mavic pro flight path records.

s
Pt Gt Gr 2
Rmax = 4
(8)
(4⇡)3 Pr,min
Fig. 7. DAR system setup (inside the vehicle).
By using (8), a theoretical maximum detection Range Rmax
(m) is calculated, for a target with a Radar Cross Section TABLE III
(m2 ), using a radar that transmits a power of Pt (Watt), with DAR S YSTEM C ONFIGURATIONS
a transmit antenna gain Gt , and a receive antenna gain Gr , Instantaneous Bandwidth (B) 40 MHz
with radar operating wavelength of (m), and a minimum System Sampling Rate (fs ) 50 MS/sec
detectable receive power Pr,min (Watt). Waveform Type LFM (CW)
Table II shows the radar system parameters, with a calcu-
Waveform duration (⌧ ) 40.96 µsec
lated maximum detection range of 1681 m. The target assumed
Coherent Processing Interval (CPI) 0.299 sec
in the calculation is a micro-UAV (DJI Mavic Pro), with 0.03
Range Resolution 3.75 m
m2 averaged RCS taken from the simulation results in the
Velocity Resolution 0.21 m/sec
previous section (S Band).
III. DAR E XPERIMENTS
Fig. 7 shows the hardware setup from inside the vehicle,
A. Measurement Configuration
which includes a signal generator for receiver array calibration,
The measurements took place inside King Saud University four Vector Signal Analyzers, Vector Signal Generator, power
campus in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The cooperative amplifier, and associated power supplies.
target (micro-UAV, Mavic Pro) flew within the transmitter and
receiver coverage, as shown in Fig. 5. The target average B. Experimental Results
speed during the receding phase of the flight scenario was 1.15 During the experiments, DAR system was configured as
m/sec, and it was 3.27 m/sec during the approaching phase. shown in Table III. An LFM waveform (continuous wave)
Measurements were carried out using a ready equipped with 40.96 µsec duration was generated (this corresponds to
vehicle with its own power generators as shown in Fig. 6. N⌧ of 2048 samples). DAR system parameters such as transmit
The receiving antennas are mounted on top of the vehicle with power and antenna gains are as indicated in Table II.
LNAs and RF switching (calibration) circuits integrated in the Fig. 8 shows the overall DAR detections of the micro-UAV
same Radome. during the flight scenario described in A. Detection probability

978-1-7281-1679-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE

Authorized licensed use limited to: National Science & Technology Development Agency. Downloaded on May 08,2023 at 02:37:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

Fig. 8. Accumulated DAR detections after CFAR (the true drone range-
velocity flight profile plotted in red for Receding, and green for Approaching).
Fig. 9. Range-Velocity Map snapshot, accumulated (from 900 m to 1050 m,
black plot is the true drone flight profile).
of the target is high at ranges less than 600 m. The confirmed
maximum detection range of the drone is around 1020 m.
Generally, DAR detections approximately followed the drone’s
range-velocity flight profile during the trial.
Fig. 9 shows the micro-UAV being detected at around 1 km
range. Although the target velocity was very low (less than
1.5 m/sec on average), the radar was still able to detect it.
Fig. 10 shows the Range-velocity map during the approach-
ing phase of the experimental scenario. The radar started to
detect the target at around 600 m. This figure depicts the fine
resolution of the radar, as slight variations of target’s range
and velocity are discernibly detected. For example, a minor
transition in the target velocity of less than 0.5 m/sec can be
observed between the ranges 440 m and 410 m.
IV. C ONCLUSION
A small scale DAR system operating in S band was de-
veloped using COTS, and its performance was investigated
experimentally against a slow-moving micro-UAV. DJI Mavic
Pro drone was used as a radar target, and its RCS was
simulated at different radar bands (L, S, and X bands). Radar
link-budget was analyzed, using the designed DAR system
parameters, and a maximum detection range of Mavic Pro
was calculated at 1681 m. A trial was conducted with the
978-1-7281-1679-2/19/$31.00 ©2019 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: National Science & Technology Development Agency. Downloaded on May 08,2023 at 02:37:26 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 10. Range-Velocity Map snapshot, accumulated (from 600 m to 100 m,
black plot is the true drone flight profile).
radar, and target detection ranges slightly exceeding 1 km were
achieved with the system. Digital techniques implemented in
DAR allowed for more flexibility in radar operation. Functions
such as transmit waveform, receive MF, and DBF are software-
reconfigurable. With spoiled transmit-beam and DBF on re-
ceive, Doppler resolution of the radar is improved significantly,
allowing for enhanced discrimination of slow targets from
stationary clutter.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank Eng. Mohammad Alzubaidi
for his contribution in conducting electromagnetic simulations
of Mavic pro drone RCS.
R EFERENCES
[1] Michael Jian, Zhenzhong Lu, Victor C. Chen, “Drone Detection and
Tracking Based on Phase-Interferometric Doppler Radar”, IEEE Radar
Conference, pp. 1146–1149, April 2018.
[2] Seungwoon Park, Seong-Ook Park, “Configuration of an X-band FMCW
Radar Targeted for Drone Detection,” International Symposium on An-
tennas and Propagation (ISAP), pp. 1–2, Oct 2017.
[3] Krzysztof Stasiak, Marek Ciesielski, Anna Kurowska, Wojciech Przybysz,
“A Study on Using Different Kinds of Continuous-Wave Radars Operating
in C-Band for Drone Detection,” 22nd International Microwave and Radar
Conference (MIKON), pp. 521–526, May 2018.
[4] M. Ritchie, F. Fioranelli, H. Griffiths, “Micro-Drone RCS Analysis,” IEEE
Radar Conference, Johannesburg, South Africa, pp.452-456, Oct. 2015.
[5] R. Nakamura and H. Hadama, “Characteristics of Ultra-Wideband
RadarEchoes from a Drone,” IEICE Communications Express, Vol. 6,
no.9, pp.530-534, 2017.
[6] S. Blake, “OS-CFAR theory for multiple targets and nonuniform clutter,
” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 24, no.
6, pp. 785–790, Nov 1988.
[7] H. Rohling, “Radar CFAR thresholding in clutter and multiple target
situations, ” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems,
vol. AES-19, no. 4, pp. 608–621, July 1983.
[8] M. A Richards, J. A. Scheer, W.A Holm, “Principles of Modern Radar:
Basic Principles”. Scitech Publishing, 2010, Vol I.
[9] W. L. Melvin, J. A. Scheer, “Principles of Modern Radar: Advanced
Techniques”. Scitech Publishing, 2013, Vol II.
[10] Abdulrazaq Aldowesh, Mobien Shoaib, Khalid Jamil, Sami Alhumaidi,
Mubashir Alam, “A passive bistatic radar experiment for very low radar
cross-section target detection”. IEEE Radar Conference, Johannesburg,
South Africa, pp.406-410, Oct. 2015.
[11] D. J. Rabideau and P. Parker, “Ubiquitous MIMO multifunction digital
array radar,” Proc. 37th Asilomar Conf. Signals, Systems and Computers,
Pacific Grove, CA, Nov. 2003.
[12] O. Adrian, ”From AESA Radar to digital Radar for surface-based
applications,” IEEE Radar Conference, May 2009.