Problem 3

Problem 3
Radar Cross Section modeling
Preethipradha Elavarasu(4123794)
Goals: simulate far-field scattering from a basic 3D body: sphere (metal and dielectric)
Tasks:
1. Calculate RCS of the metal sphere with and without symmetry:
The above graph shows the relation between RCS and frequency with and without
symmetry. With symmetry is mentioned with blue curve and without symmetry by
red curve. The convergence here is similar but, symmetrical one is considered
good since the computational gain can be obtained.
* What is dependence of RCS over the frequency?
From the above graph we see that, the variation of RCS is frequent even with
small change of frequency. But in general it depends on the scatter space .In case
of small space, there has to be large frequency change to get a significant RCS
change.
* How it can be that RCS can be 3.5 large than sphere’s geometric cross section?
The geometric cross section σ is  r 2 where r is the radius of the sphere. Here,
for metallic sphere, r=0.05m and hence, σ=7.85 ×10-3 m2.For the symmetric
metallic sphere,  =0.05, since f=6GHz. Hence, 2 r /  ~3.5. Thus, we can see
that, there is a increase in RCS from the usual  r 2 value.
2. Calculated RCS of the dielectric sphere using surface equivalent principle (SEP)
method and FEM:
The above figure shows us the relationship between FEM and SEP.The red curve
is for FEM and the blue one for SEP.
* What is the dependence of RCS over the frequency?
As seen from the graph, the RCS increases with increase in frequency.
* Do you observe discrepancy of (SEP) method and FEM?
The SEP method is generally used to give the electric and magnetic field along
the surface of the dielectric which means that it uses two basis functions for each
pair of the triangles and mesh refinement is also required. In case of our example,
the meshing has 552 triangles for the surface of a dielectric.
The FEM includes the complete information of the volume for the meshing to be
done, unlike the surface integral techniques which involve only surfaces in the
meshing process .In case of our example, the meshing has 2368 tetrahedral
volume elements.
3. Computational aspects
* What is the computational gain (reduction of the number of unknowns and the
computational time) by taken into account the target and incident wave symmetry?
For symmetrical,
488 metallic triangles in free space.
SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TIMES IN SECONDS
CPU-time runtime
Reading and constructing the geometry 0.009 0.009
Checking the geometry 0.004 0.004
Initialisation of the Greens function 0.001 0.001
Calcul. of coupling for PO/Fock 0.001 0.001
Calcul. of matrix elements 19.802 19.802
Calcul. of right-hand side vector 0.074 0.074
Preconditioning system of linear eqns. 0.072 0.072
Solution of the system of linear eqns. 0.422 0.421
Determination of surface currents 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of impedances/powers/losses 0.127 0.129
Calcul. of averaged SAR values 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of power ideal receiving ant. 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of cable coupling 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of electric near field 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of magnetic near field 0.000 0.000
Calcul. of far field 0.094 0.094
other 0.035 0.034
----------- -----------
total times: 20.641 20.641
(total times in hours: 0.006 0.006)
Peak memory usage during the whole solution: 1.286 MByte
The above values can be exactly halved as it is symmetrical. The computation of

one half would be sufficient as the same applies to the other half of the
symmetrical sphere. Thus, the computation time and the unknowns mentioned
above can be reduced to half.
For non-symmetrical,
420 metallic triangles in free space
CPU-time runtime
other 0.015 0.015
----------- -----------
total times: 51.343 51.344
*What is the computational time and memory needed for the surface equivalence
principal (SEP) method?
CPU-time runtime
other 0.022 0.021
----------- -----------
total times: 54.487 54.487
* What is the computational time and memory needed for the FEM method?
CPU-time runtime
other 0.216 0.216
----------- -----------
total times: 68.093 68.094
The computational cost in FEM is found high compared to SEP method.
* Check convergence of the computation for RCS by reducing the length of triangles
from lambda/8 to lambda/10, lambda/18 and lambda/20.
By reducing the size of the triangles we do get a more refined output compared to
larger triangle size, but, the CPU time obviously becomes high with more fine
meshes.
* What is your advice about necessary size of triangles at the surface to achieve 1%
accuracy in RCS?
In order to get a refined and accurate (approx 100%) output, the triangle size has
to be made smaller. Thus, in case of larger triangular size, the model gives a
response that is coarse and not very accurate (approx 1%).
* What would be your advice with respect to the discretization of the surface for
wideband simulations?
In general, wideband response of the surface is desired for all applications. The
frequency domain techniques that we use here (Method of Moments) require an
impedance matrix generation for each new frequency and hence for a wideband,
this would turn computation to a complex one. Few techniques involved are
impedance matrix interpolation and model based parameter estimation
(MBPE).But still they do have a problem when the matrix size become large.
Another option is to use high basis functions to reduce the matrix size is the
Characteristic Basis Function Method (CBMoM) and this uses the Characteristic
Basis Function (CBF) for the induced current that is unknown. This method seems
little better than RWG method (which has computational complexity O (n2)).There
are also few other methods which is not discussed in detail in this report.

Problem 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Problem 3

Radar Cross Section modeling

* What is dependence of RCS over the frequency?

* What is the dependence of RCS over the frequency?

* Do you observe discrepancy of (SEP) method and FEM?

SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TIMES IN SECONDS

Peak memory usage during the whole solution: 1.286 MByte

The above values can be exactly halved as it is symmetrical. The computation of

SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TIMES IN SECONDS

Peak memory usage during the whole solution: 3.253 MByte

SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TIMES IN SECONDS

Peak memory usage during the whole solution: 5.595 MByte

SUMMARY OF REQUIRED TIMES IN SECONDS

Peak memory usage during the whole solution: 8.721 MByte

The computational cost in FEM is found high compared to SEP method.

You might also like