• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Answers 2 answers
  • Subscribers 29 subscribers
  • Views 1912 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

AWR1642BOOST: radar cross section estimation from 2D FFT

krishna kishore andhavarapu86
Prodigy 30 points
Part Number: AWR1642BOOST

Hi all,

I am wondering if we can estimate the RCS of an object from 2D FFT. Can someone let me know if that can be done.

Thanks & Regards,

Krishna.

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 22155 points
    Hello Krishna,

    The query on how to measure RCS is answered below:
    e2e.ti.com/.../634697

    Thanks,
    Raghu
  • 0 in reply to Raghunandan Kamath
    Prodigy 30 points
    Hi Raghu,

    Thank you for your prompt reply. I understand that we can measure RCS from received power spectrum. I wanted to know if the measurement is still valid if I perform 2D FFT over multiple chirps and pick appropriate doppler bin.

    Regards,
    Krishna.
  • 0 in reply to krishna kishore andhavarapu86
    TI__Expert 4720 points
    Hi Krishna,

    Computing the SNR after the '1D FFT' or the '2D FFT' should result in a similar measurement*. In fact, computing the SNR after '2D FFT' is recommended, since the 'thermal noise floor' can be easily identified in the '2D FFT' output . If the radar is stationary, and all targets, except a few are also stationary, then you'd be able to find a large area (in the 2D FFT) that has no object or leakage from object. You can use this area to compute the noise floor.


    * There are correction factors associated the 'windows' that you may have used prior to an FFT. For example if you use a Hann window, there will be a small (2-3 dB reduction in the signal power). It is recommended that you not use windows in your FFTs when making these kind of measurements.
    * Also, I would suggest that you do a large zero padded FFT (or a zoom FFT) implementation to sample the true peak of the signal. Otherwise there may be an interpolation loss as well.

    Regards
    Anil
  • 0 in reply to Anil Mani
    Prodigy 30 points

    Hi Anil,

    This has answered my query. Thank you for your suggestions.

    Regards,

    Krishna.