On the Imaging of Surface Gravity Waves by

Marine Radar: Implications for a Moving

Platform

*Björn Lund, Clarence Collins, Hans Graber,

§
Eric Terrill

*Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami

§
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego

October 28, 2013

Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
Introduction

Marine radars were developed for ship detection → Sea clutter

first analyzed as noise (e.g. Croney ’66)
Today, marine radar data are being used to determine
fully-directional wave spectra (Young et al. 1985) as well as
phase-resolved maps of the surface elevation (Borge et al. 2004)
Surface currents and bathymetry may be obtained as a
by-product of the wave analysis (Senet et al. 2001, Bell 1999)
In addition, marine radar data have been used to study internal
waves (Watson and Robinson 1990, Lund et al. 2012), winds
(Dankert et al. 2003, Lund et al. 2012), oil spills (Gangeskar
2004), ...
Motivation

Previous studies, focused on fixed platform data (e.g. from light

houses or oil rigs), established marine radar as reliable wave and
current sensor (Borge and Soares 2000, Wyatt et al. 2003)
Recent results suggest that shipboard marine radar wave height
estimates cannot be trusted (Stredulinsky and Thornhill 2011)
Wave and current retrieval from ships remains challenging due to:
Ship-motion-induced Doppler shift leads to aliased wave energy
Jittering wave signal due to changing ship heading
Results’ dependency on angle between analysis box and waves

Study goals:
Develop new techniques that address ship-motion-related marine
radar wave and current retrieval issues
Demonstrate possibility to reliably determine waves and currents
from shipborne marine radar data
Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
System Specs

Radar antenna: Hardware diagram: Polar backscatter

image:
Antenna

Scanner

Screen

Video PC with
Radar
Trigger WaMoS
display
Heading capture
unit
Bearing board

Furuno marine X-band radar operating at 9.4 GHz with

HH-polarization and grazing incidence angle
Pulse length of 0.07 μs (short pulse mode) → 10.5 m range
resolution
Antenna length of 8 feet → 0.75° antenna beam width
1.5 s antenna rotation period
Wave Monitoring System (WaMoS) sampling up to 4 km with cell
size of 0.2° in azimuth and 7.5 m in range
Hi-Res Experiment

High Resolution Air-Sea Interaction (Hi-Res), off San Francisco, 2010.

Map of Hi-Res experiment: R/P Flip:

-124.40 -123.60 -122.80 -122.00
39.00

39.00
California
38.60

38.60
06/06, 19:00 UTC R/P Flip
R/V Sproul:
38.20

38.20
37.80

37.80

06/10, 12:00 UTC

-124.40 -123.60 -122.80 -122.00 Source: ucsd.edu

Marine Radar Image and Spectrum

Ramp-corrected marine radar image: Frequency-wavenumber slice through

center of 3D image spectrum:
FLP, 06/11/2010, 00:00:01.3 UTC
4 10
Head N 2.0

8 First harmonic
2

Angular frequency [rad s-1]

Ramp-divided return
1.5
6
y [km]

0
1.0 Fundamental
4 mode

-2
2 0.5

Group line
Wind
-4 0 0.0
-4 -2 0 2 4 -0.4 -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4
x [km] Wavenumber [rad m-1]
Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
Marine Radar Image Data Concept

Traditional approach (snapshot Accurate view (spiraling data stream):

simplification):

Source: Borge et al. 1999

Antenna Heading Correction

Pre-correction wave analysis window Pre-correction wave analysis window

at t = 0 s: at t = 6 s:

0.5 0.5
y [km]

y [km]
0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5

-0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5

x [km] x [km]
Antenna Heading Correction

Pre-correction wave analysis window Pre-correction wave analysis window

at t = 1.5 s: at t = 7.5 s:

0.5 0.5
y [km]

y [km]
0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5

-0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5

x [km] x [km]
Antenna Heading Correction

Extension of Bell and Osler’s (2011) wave-signature-based heading correction.

Heading errors: Heading pre- and post-correction:

2 116
Before heading correction
Radar pulse heading error [°]

115 After heading correction

1

Ship heading [°]

114

0 113

112
-1
111

-2 110
0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80
Time [s] Time [s]
Antenna Heading Correction

Post-correction wave analysis window Post-correction wave analysis window

at t = 0 s: at t = 6 s:

0.5 0.5
y [km]

y [km]
0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5

-0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5

x [km] x [km]
Antenna Heading Correction

Post-correction wave analysis window Post-correction wave analysis window

at t = 1.5 s: at t = 7.5 s:

0.5 0.5
y [km]

y [km]
0.0 0.0

-0.5 -0.5

-0.5 0.0 0.5 -0.5 0.0 0.5

x [km] x [km]
Dependency of Results on Analysis Box Position

Traditional analysis window setup: Test setup:

FLP, 06/11/2010, 00:00:01.3 UTC FLP, 06/11/2010, 00:00:01.3 UTC
2 4 4 4
Head N Head N

1 3 2 3

Radar return [×103]

Radar return [×103]

y [km]

y [km]
0 2 0 2

-1 1 -2 1

Wind Wind
-2 0 -4 0
-2 -1 0 1 2 -4 -2 0 2 4
x [km] x [km]
Dependency of Results on Analysis Box Position
Downwave Crosswave Upwave Crosswave Downwave

8
Signal-to-noise ratio
6

10
Peak wave period [s]

Color legend:
9
Near range,
8
mid range,
7
far range.
335
Peak wave direction [°]

330

325

320

315

310

305
-100 0 100
Box − peak wave direction [°]
Signal-to-Noise Ratio Dependency on Box Orientation

Downwave Crosswave Upwave Crosswave Downwave

8
t = 0.5 h
t = 1.6 h
t = 2.7 h
Signal-to-noise ratio

6 t = 3.8 h
t = 4.9 h
t = 6.0 h
4

0
-100 0 100
Box − peak wave direction [°]
Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
Example of Marine Radar Wave Spectrum

Ramp-corrected radar image:

FLP, 06/11/2010, 00:00:01.3 UTC
Marine radar frequency-direction
4 10 spectrum:
Head N
8
2

Ramp-divided return
6
y [km]

-2
2

Wind
-4 0
-4 -2 0 2 4
x [km]
Comparison with Datawell Buoy and ADCP Data

Time series of waves:

Time series of currents:

Datawell buoy data courtesy of

Thomas Herbers.
Comparison with Datawell Wave Spectra

Frequency spectrum at t = 0 h: Frequency spectrum at t = 5 h:

1.0 1.0
Marine radar Marine radar
Datawell buoy Datawell buoy
Normalized wave energy

Normalized wave energy

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
Frequency [Hz] Frequency [Hz]
Outline

1 Introduction

2 Data Overview

3 Moving Platform Challenges and Solutions

4 Preliminary Results

5 Conclusions
Summary / Outlook

Identified ship-motion-related marine radar wave and current

retrieval issues and proposed solutions:
Aliasing due to Doppler-shift from vessel motion
→ Geo-referencing
Jittering wave signal due to Gyro compass errors
→ Antenna heading correction
Wave retrieval dependency on range and antenna look direction
→ Correction function
Shipborne marine radar waves and currents are in good
agreement with measured and modeled reference data
Current research focuses on modeling of wave signal’s
dependency on range and antenna look direction
Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the

Center for Southeastern Tropical
Advanced Remote Sensing (CSTARS)
of the University of Miami and the
U.S. Office of Naval Research (ONR)
under grants N000140510758,
N000140710650, N000140810793,
and N000140910392.