Graphics Programs Reference
In-Depth Information
Furthermore the non-coherent integration loss associated with this case is com-
puted from Eq. (1.85),
1
+
3.635
3.635
L
NCI
=
----------------------
=
1 . 2 7
⇒
L
NCI
=
1.056
dB
(1.106)
It follows that the corresponding
single pulse
energy for the missile and the
aircraft cases are respectively given by
4(
3
kT
e
FLR
4
(
SNR
)
1
E
m
=
---------------------------------------------------------
⇒
G
2
λ
2
σ
m
(1.107)
)
4
10
0.56
4(
3
23
) 10
0.8
) 10
0.6
10
3
(
1.38
×
10
) 290
(
(
(
) 55
(
×
E
m
=
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=
0 . 1658
Joules
)
2
)
2
(
2827.4
(
0.1
(
0.5
)
4(
3
kT
e
FLR
4
(
SNR
)
1
E
a
=
--------------------------------------------------------
⇒
G
2
λ
2
σ
a
(1.108)
)
4
10
0.56
4(
3
23
) 10
0.8
) 10
0.6
10
3
(
1.38
×
10
) 290
(
(
(
) 90
(
×
E
a
=
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=
0 . 1 4 8 7
Joules
)
2
)
2
(
2827.4
(
0.1
()
Hence, the peak power that satisfies the single pulse detection requirement for
both target types is
E
---
0.1658
1 0
6
P
t
== =
--------------------
165.8
KW
(1.109)
×
The radar equation with pulse integration is
P
t
1
G
2
λ
2
σ
4(
3
kT
e
BFLR
4
n
p
L
NCI
-----------------------------------------
------------
SNR
=
(1.110)
Figure 1.27
shows the SNR versus detection range for both target-types with
and without integration. To reproduce this figure use MATLAB program
Ðfig1_27.mÑ
which is given in Listing 1.12 in Section 1.10.
1.9.4. A Design Alternative
One could have elected not to reduce the single pulse peak power, but rather
keep the single pulse peak power as computed in Eq. (1.109) and increase the
radar detection range. For example, integrating 7 pulses coherently would
improve the radar detection range by a factor of
()
0.25
R
imp
=
=
1.63
(1.111)
Search WWH ::
Custom Search