IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO.
8, AUGUST 2013
A Design and Assessment of a Direction Finding
Proximity Fuze Sensor
Jae-Hyun Choi, Myung-Suk Jung, and Kyung-Whan Yeom, Member, IEEE
Abstract— This paper presents the implementation and assess-
ment of a direction finding proximity fuze sensor for anti-
aircrafts or anti-air missiles. A higher rejection of clutter signals
is achieved by employing a binary phase shift keying modulation
using Legendre sequence. The direction finding is implemented
by comparing received powers from six receiving antennas
equally spaced by an angle of 60° around a cylindrical surface.
In addition, target detection algorithms have been developed for a
robust detection of the target, taking the wide variation of target
related parameters into considerations. The performances of the
developed fuze sensor are experimentally verified by constructing
the fuze-specific encounter simulation test apparatus, which
collects and analyzes reflected signals from a standard target. The
developed fuze sensor can successfully detect the −10 dBsm target
over a 10 m range as well as the direction with an out-of-range
rejection of about 40 dB. Furthermore, the developed fuze sensor
can clearly detect the target with mesh clutter environment.
To assess realistic operation, the fuze sensor is tested using
155 mm gun firing test setup. Through the gun firing test, the
successful fuzing range and direction finding performances are
demonstrated.
Index Terms— BPSK, Legendre sequence, auto correlation,
range gate, clutter rejection, direction finding fuze.
I. I NTRODUCTION
T HE POOR quality of anti-aircraft artillery could be traced
to the uncertainties in determining the range to a target
and in setting a time fuze accordingly. A proximity fuze can
effectively resolve these problems by sensing the presence of
the target [1], [2]. The proximity fuze operates to detonate in
close encounter and results in the increase of the probability
of the successful elimination of the threatening target. The
effectiveness of such operation in the elimination of target
rather than by direct hit has been proven from the experiences
of ordnance operation [3]. Thus, most recent missile warheads
are equipped with a proximity fuze to maximize the probability
of kill [4], [5].
For the previously explained purpose of the proximity fuze,
the proximity fuze sensor should have the primary function
that can detect the presence of the target as well as can
acquire the target related information, such as its position,
Manuscript received February 22, 2013; revised April 5, 2013; accepted
April 22, 2013. Date of publication April 30, 2013; date of current version
July 10, 2013. The associate editor coordinating the review of this paper and
approving it for publication was Dr. Francis P. Hindle.
J.-H. Choi and M.-S. Jung are with the Agency for Defense Development,
Daejeon 305-600, Korea (e-mail: tang@add.re.kr; Mungdol@add.re.kr).
K.-W. Yeom is with the Department of Radio Science and Engi-
neering, Chungnam National University, Daejeon 305-764, Korea (e-mail:
khyeom@cnu.ac.kr).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSEN.2013.2260326
1530-437X/$31.00 © 2013 IEEE
3079
velocity, and orientation. In addition, the proximity fuze has
the ability to determine optimum time and direction to detonate
the warhead using the acquired information [4], [5]. Thus, a
target at pre-determined distance can be eliminated by the
automatic explosion more successfully than direct contact
using the on-board proximity fuze sensor and the maximum
weapon effectiveness can be achieved [6].
Various types of proximity fuzes are currently employed,
and they can be categorized into inductive/capacitive type,
radar type, and active/passive infrared type [7]. The advantage
of each type depends on its application, so the type of
proximity fuze is relevant to operating environments, such as
detection ranges and targets type coming from the ground,
submarine, and air. For example, the laser proximity fuze [8]
using a laser beam to detect a target is less susceptible to
electronic interference but has shorter detection range. The
capacitance proximity fuze [9] which utilizes the capacitance
between detector and the ground as a detection mechanism
is efficient for the target coming from the ground. The radar
type proximity fuze presented in this paper, however, is the
best solution for a type of target from the air considering
detection range, and directional target detection. Among radar-
type proximity fuzes, techniques based on interferometry,
FMCW, and code-correlation have been applied to proximity
fuze sensors. However, the interferometry technique is strongly
limited to the unambiguous range by the periodicity of signals
Several researches using FMCW method have been published
and promising for cost effectiveness [10], [11]. However,
their applications to the proximity sensor for air targets have
not been reported and the code correlation detection method
employed in our fuze sensor
The unique feature of the radar type proximity design is that
the target does not behave as in a conventional radar design at
fuzing range. Due to the close range and the generally narrow
antenna beam of the fuze, the target is only partially illumi-
nated. The fuze sees only one or a small collection of target in
the near field. The situation is significantly different from the
usual scenarios in conventional radars. It is therefore important
to have a fuze-specific method [7]. Thus, the radar type prox-
imity fuze generally utilizes a correlation detection method
to extract the range information of a target. The correlation
method using PN (Pseudo-Noise) code phase modulation has
advantage in controlling the burst point [12]. Particularly, the
PN code sequence provides a lower autocorrelation at out-of-
range and leads to a lower interference and higher immunity
to noise [13]. Many studies have been conducted to design
binary sequences whose aperiodic autocorrelations are optimal
and have small peak side-lobe level [14]–[16].
3080 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO. 8, AUGUST 2013

This paper presents a design and assessment of a radar-

type target detecting fuze sensor for anti-aircrafts or anti-air
missiles. The fuze sensor consists of the antenna, transmitting/
receiving, and signal processing sections. Three transmitting
antennas and six receiving antennas are separately wrapped
around the circumference of the missile. The range and
direction of a target at close range are acquired through
signal processing of the received signals from six receiving
antennas using a novel adaptive target detection and direction
finding algorithms. Especially, Legendre sequence [17] which
has recently been attracting the attention of many researchers
due to its excellent side-lobe suppression is employed for the
fuze sensor. Compared to the commonly used pseudo noise
m-sequence, Legendre sequence provides higher out-of-range
rejection because the Legendre sequences offer more freedom
in selecting code lengths than are available from maximal
length sequences [18]. (a)
To assess the performances of the developed fuze sensor,
we implemented an indoor encounter simulation test apparatus
as a beginning step for the assessment of the developed fuze
sensor, which provides the repeatability or accuracy of data.
The developed fuze sensor was mounted on the unmanned
car and the received signals of the developed fuze sensor
are automatically collected and recorded as data. The results
showed that the –10 dBsm RCS standard target can be
successfully detected from over 10 m range and the target
direction can be successfully found with a resolution of 30° .
In addition, the target even in mesh clutter environment can be
(b) (c)
clearly detected. After successful demonstration in the indoor
environment, the fuze sensor was tested using more realistic Fig. 1. (a) Block diagram of the direction finding fuze sensor. Arrangement
155 mm gun firing test setup. Through the gun firing test, the of (b) transmitting antennas and (c) receiving antennas.
designed fuze sensor is proven to show the successful fuzing
range and direction finding performances.
Of the six receiving antennas, 3 antennas (RX1, RX3, and
II. F UZE S ENSOR S YSTEM RX5) are connected to the 3 receivers. The received signals
from the remaining 3 receiving antennas are processed at the
A. Theory of Operation next time frame. The received signal is shifted in frequency
The block diagram of the direction finding fuze sensor domain by Doppler frequency, ωd = 2π f d according to the
is shown in Fig. 1(a). The CW signal of carrier frequency, relative speed between the fuze sensor and the target. Also, the
ωo = 2π f o which is digitally BPSK-modulated by code, m(t) received signal is delayed by the target range in time domain.
is transmitted through three identical transmitting antennas. Thus, one of the received signals through the RX antenna can
The signal before one of the TX antenna is given by be expressed as
x T (t) = A T m(t) cos ωo t (1)
x R (t) = A R m(t − τ R ) cos ((ωo + ωd )(t − τ R ) + φ) (2)
where A T is the amplitude of TX signal. Here m(t) takes
the value +1 or –1. The TX antennas are spaced by 120° Here, τ R is the time delay. To remove the carrier frequency
angle around a cylindrical surface as shown in Fig. 1(b). The from the received signal, the received signal is down-converted
transmitting antenna has 3 dB beamwidth of 60° azimuthally to the IF signal by the mixer with the LO signal of carrier
and 20° in elevation direction. The main beams of the TX frequency f o . The down-converted signal and spurs from the
antennas are tilted toward the nose of the missile to detect mixer are filtered out by the lowpass filter (LPF) which has a
high speed targets. cutoff frequency of about 1 GHz. The IF signal can be written
Six identical receiving antennas are used to receive the as
reflected signal from a target and they are similarly spaced  
by an angle of 60° around a cylindrical surface as shown in x I F (t) = A I F m(t − τ R ) cos ωd t + φ  (3)
Fig. 1(c). The receiving antenna has the same 3 dB beamwidth
shape as that of the transmitting antenna. The transmitting and The IF signal is then correlated with the delayed code, which
receiving antennas have the linear polarization. Consequently is obtained by delaying the code used in transmitting. Thus,
the trigger angle can be set for every 30° as shown in Fig. 1(c). the correlated signal is composed of both the correlation code
CHOI et al.: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF A DIRECTION FINDING PROXIMITY FUZE SENSOR
and the Doppler signal as,
 
x C (t) = A I F m(t − τ R )m(t − τ D ) cos ωd t + φ 
 
= A I F x(t, τ ) cos ωd t + φ  (4)
where, τ = τ D –τ R . Since the m(t) has the period T , which is
related to the code length or pulse repetition frequency (PRF)
1/T , x(t,τ ) also has a period, T . Thus, x C (t) can be expanded
into Fourier series with period T as,
∞
  
x C (t) =A I F cos ωd t + φ  X (ωT , τ )e j nωT t (5)
n=−∞
where ωT = 2π/T . In the system design, ωT is generally
set higher than the Doppler frequency. If the Doppler filter
is narrow enough for only the Doppler frequency component
to pass, mixing frequencies such as ωd ± nωT (n = 1,2,)
are all suppressed. Only the Doppler frequency component
will appear at the Doppler filter output. As a result, the
Doppler signal is a measure of the target presence. However,
the Doppler frequency varies depending on the relative speed
of the target. The bandwidth of the Doppler filter should
be simultaneously set wide enough to pass such spread CW
Doppler signal. The resulting signal after the Doppler filter
will be
 
x D (t) = A I F cos ωd t + φ  X (0, τ )

  1 T
= A I F cos ωd t + φ  m(t)m(t + τ )dt
T 0
 
= A I F cos ωd t + φ  R(τ ) (6)
Here, R(τ ) is the autocorrelation of the code m(t).
Generally, R(τ ) shows a periodic triangular pulse shape
with a period T , equal to the code length of m(t). For a well
selected code, the correlated output shows a peak in the case
of delay match τ = 0; otherwise, a small suppressed output.
Thus, a CW Doppler signal with large amplitude results in
delay match, otherwise a noise-like wide spread spectrum
signal results.
Due to the periodic nature of R(τ ), any target can be
detected within the range corresponding to the code length
with an appropriate delayed code. However, the fuze sensor
should operate when the target is in close range. A small part
of the range from the full range determined by the code length
is assigned to the fuzing range. The fuzing range is determined
by the range corresponding to three bit code widths, delay 1,
delay 2, and delay 3 in Fig. 1(a), which are formed by
successively delaying one bit code width. Three correlators
which respectively correlate the received signal to the corre-
sponding delayed codes are connected in parallel to each IF
output. Thus, 3 range gated signals (RG1, RG2, and RG3)
are produced per one received signal as shown in Fig. 1(a).
Thus, only the target within the 3 range gates can be detected
and the signals from the target out of the 3 range gates are
suppressed by the autocorrelation property and are thus not
detected.
The direction of a target can be obtained by compar-
ing received powers from three receiving antennas. Initially,
reflected signals from the target are received by the 3 receiving
3081
antennas (RX1, RX3, RX5 or RX2, RX4, RX6), respectively.
The direction can be determined using the range-gated signal
which yields the maximum power level among the resulting
9 range-gated signals (RX1-RG1, …, RX5-RG3). Then, the
antenna which received maximum power and its neighboring
two receiving antennas are set to be connected to the 3
receivers. The switching time of the SPDT (Single Pole
Double Throw) is 3 ns. For example, if the signal from RX1
antenna is maximum, the 3 receivers are then connected to
3 antennas RX1, RX2, RX6 at the next time frame. Thus,
the direction can be resolved into an angle of 30°. Other
algorithms or other type antenna arrays for direction finding
may improve the angle resolution. However, a 30° resolution
is enough for our purpose, the previously explained amplitude
comparison technique is employed.
Coupling between the TX and RX antennas can deteriorate
the designed radiation patterns, and the isolation between the
antennas is thus controlled to be above 70 dB to minimize
the coupling effect. To minimize the mutual coupling between
TX and RX antennas, the TX and RX antennas are arrayed
for H-plane mutual coupling to be dominant. H-plane coupling
provides more isolation than E-plane coupling when TX and
RX antennas are separated with the same spacing.
B. Code
To determine a code completely, the width, length, and type
of a code should be determined. The code width is related to
range resolution [19] which is defined as the main lobe width
of the autocorrelation of the selected code. As the code width
becomes narrower better range resolution can be obtained.
However, the narrower the code width the wider the bandwidth
required. For a code width t, the range resolution is ct
because the autocorrelation has generally the triangular pulse
with the main lobe width of (ct). Taking the target size into
consideration, the code width is set to 20 ns corresponding to
a range resolution of 6 m. Thus using three consecutive code
delays, it is possible to detect a target up to about 12 m.
The code length N which also determines pulse repetition
frequency (PRF) is related to out-of range rejection. Generally,
the autocorrelation of N-bit PN sequences shows a triangular
pulse with a pulse width of ct and a period of N · c t/2.
When the peak value of the autocorrelation is normalized as
1, the value outside the triangular pulse width becomes –1/N
and the resulting out-of-range rejection becomes –20log(1/N).
If the out-of-range rejection is set small, it is possible that
long distance sea clutter which is not a target can be detected.
If N is increased to get more out-of- range rejection, the
PRF becomes lower. However, in the case of lower PRF, the
mixed frequency component in equation (5) such as PRF– f d
can appear in the Doppler band. For such a reason, the
determination of the optimum code length is also related to
the Doppler frequency
The Doppler frequency varies with the relative speed of the
target to the fuze sensor. The relative speed of the target can be
estimated to be about Mach 0.2 ∼ 6 and the resulting Doppler
frequency can be estimated to be about 2.2 kHz ∼ 68 kHz at
X-band taking the relative speed and the encounter angle into
3082 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO. 8, AUGUST 2013

Fig. 2. Autocorrelation of the 211-bits Legendre sequence for the 3 range

gates of the 20 ns code width.

consideration. The bandwidth of the Doppler filter which is

set as 2 ∼ 130 kHz is 2 times wider than the possible high
(a)
end Doppler frequency. The Doppler frequency is measured
through FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) in the fuze sensor. In
the estimation of the Doppler frequency, more than two periods
of the Doppler signal is required. When the bandwidth is set
as 2.2 kHz ∼ 68 kHz to include just possible Doppler fre-
quencies, the estimated Doppler frequency through FFT may
yield a large error due to transient waveform especially at the
higher Doppler frequency. Thus the Doppler filter in Fig. 1(a)
is implemented using a band pass filter having a bandwidth of
2 ∼ 130 kHz. The Doppler filter set as such provides all
the spur frequencies appearing due to the transient waveform
below 10 dB. Also, the band pass filter is implemented as a
replaceable type filter for the later encounter simulation test
use.
For the designed Doppler filter, PRF of above 235 kHz is
considered to be appropriate; which means that the length is (b)
shorter than 213-bit code length. However, commonly used
Fig. 3. Ambiguity function of the 211-bit Legendre sequence: (a) 3D
m-sequence does not provide a continuous length and the ambiguity function plot and (b) its contour plot.
available length is limited to N = 2m –1 The closest length to
213 for m-sequence occurs at the values of m =7 (27 –1=127)
and m = 8(28–1=255), which is too widely spread. Unlike
the m-sequence, Legendre sequence provides a more flexible shows very low sidelobes. Based on the ambiguity function
code length Legendre sequence of length N (N is a prime plot, the selected 211-bit Legendre sequence is able to extract
number) [14] is defined as Doppler frequency with little ambiguity.
 The computation of the mixing frequencies between PRF
1 if i is a qudratic residue modulo n
ai = (7) and f d in equation (5) for various relative speed of target
−1 otherwise is summarized in Table 1. In Table 1, the mixing frequency
Also it is known that a necessary and sufficient condition for between PRF and f d clearly appears higher than the high end
which Legendre sequence has the optimum autocorrelation frequency of the Doppler filter 130 kHz. Thus, the mixing
characteristic occurs at the length N = 4k–1. The closest frequencies for the target with the specified relative speed do
length below 213 satisfying the conditions is found to be not fall within the established Doppler bandwidth.
211 and the 211-bit Legendre sequence is selected. The Other mixing terms can arise due to the incomplete spur
corresponding PRF is computed to be 237 kHz. The 211- suppression. The mixing frequency component due to strong
bit Legendre sequence having 20 ns code width provides an Doppler may be observed at PRF–2 f d . This frequency compo-
out-of-range rejection of about 46.5 dB and 633 m repetition nent may fall into the established Doppler bandwidth at high
distances relative speed above Mach 4. However, the magnitude of this
Figure 2 shows the auto correlation characteristics of range frequency component is found to be about –48 dB lower than
gates of the fuze sensor with a code width of 20 ns, and length that of the Doppler from the simulation, which is far below
of 211-bit. Delay times of the three delayed codes which are the sensitivity of the designed sensor.
used in the fuze sensor are 20 ns, 40 ns and 60 ns, respectively. It should be noted that, the designed Doppler filter and PRF
Figures 3(a) and 3(b) show the 3D ambiguity function and using Legendre sequence may lead to false alarm in the case of
its contour plot associated with the 211-bit Legendre sequence the presence of an undesirable worst-case second-round target
[20]. The zero Doppler uncertainty is similar to autocorrelation which is not in the fuzing range but a strong RCS above the
shown in Fig. 2 and the zero delay uncertainty shows the first out-of range rejection of 46.5 dB. In that case, the only way
null at 83.5 kHz. It should be noted that the ambiguity function is to increase the code length to above 211-bit. However, the
CHOI et al.: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF A DIRECTION FINDING PROXIMITY FUZE SENSOR
TABLE I
M IXING F REQUENCIES B ETWEEN T HE PRF O F T HE 211- BIT L EGENDRE S EQUENCE A ND F d A CCORDING T O R ELATIVE S PEED
211-bit PRF=237.0 kHz
Mach 0.5 1.0 2.0
fd (kHz) 7.5 15.0 30.0
PRF– fd (kHz) 229.5 222.0 207.0
code length increase may cause the mixing frequency between
PRF and Doppler to fall within the Doppler bandwidth. Thus,
although variable code length is possible in the fuze sensor,
the variable code length is not employed and the code length is
fixed as 211-bit. As a result, the resulting out of range rejection
is limited to 46.5 dB.
III. TARGET D ETECTION A LGORITHM
A. Variable Signal Processing Time
The decision time of the target presence may be a key
in the signal processing of the Doppler signals depending
on the relative velocity between the fuze sensor and target.
Basically, the signal processing system of the proximity fuze
sensor should have fast processing ability and reasonable
system architecture [21]. When the processing time is set
to a slow relative speed, the decision may be made after
passing the target with fast relative speed. Using the received
Doppler signals, the relative speed can be found and the signal
processing time is set to be varied according to the acquired
relative speed. Thus, the algorithm is designed with a time to
pass a fixed 0.5 m range. In the case of slow relative speed,
the decision time gets longer but in the higher relative speed,
processing time becomes short. We assume that the length
of the smallest target is 2 m and make a decision during
the passing of every 0.5 m, which makes it possible for the
smallest target to be detected at least four times. Besides, this
algorithm can be applied over extensive relative speed range
as the encounter simulation tests were performed at very low
speed.
B. Adaptive Threshold
The Doppler filter outputs in Fig. 1(a) are sampled in
parallel for A/D conversion at a variable rate depending on
the relative speed The sampling time is normally set to a
third of the pre-described variable signal processing time. The
samples in Fig. 4 represent the A/D converted digital data for a
range gated signal. The decision of the presence of the target
using the A/D converted data at each sample time requires
a threshold which reflects noise and clutter. The threshold
level Vt h generally depends on noise level, clutter, flying
environment, and various unpredictable circumstances. Thus,
the adaptive threshold level which can be varied with noise
level and clutter should be defined and measured in advance
for the decision. Such adaptive threshold level decision is
similar to conventional radars but the fuze sensor faces various
environments different from those of the conventional radars.
In the case of CFAR (Constant False Alarm Rate) receivers
generally applied to radars, the CFAR calculated using average
3083
3.0 4.0 5.0
45.0 60.0 75.0
192.0 177.0 162.0
Fig. 4. Guard data set up for calculating variable threshold.
noise level or clutter in both sides of the target cell is used.
However, both sides of the target cells cannot be used in
the fuze sensor which means the decision is made after the
fuze sensor passes through the target and only the past data
should be used. Thus, noise level of each receiving channel
is measured in the range where no other target is present and
used as the adaptive threshold level. Specifically the adaptive
threshold level is determined as
Vt h = m + kv σ (8)
where m is the average level of noise, σ is the standard devi-
ation of noise, and kv is the constant value which maintains
the false alarm rate Pfa constant (for example, kv is 3.72 that
provides Pfa = 10−4 ). In the computation of kv , the target
model and clutter are assumed to be independent random
variables with Gaussian distribution [22]–[23]. The average
level of the noise is determined using
Sample[n − j − 1]+ · · · + Sample[n − j − k]
m= (9)
k
where the integer n represents the current sampling time. The
integer j represents the number of guard sampled data and
k is the number of sampled data for threshold calculation as
shown in Fig. 4
Guard sampled data are not included for calculation of the
variable threshold level. Guard sampled data prevent the fuze
sensor from being unable to detect the target. If the received
signal increases slowly, the situation of missing the target can
occur due to the slowly increasing variable threshold level
although the received signal is at a detectable level. Thus, in
the computation of the variable threshold level, the sampled
data prior to the guard sampled data section are used. The
decision of the target presence is performed by comparing the
current sampled data with the previously determined variable
threshold level. The integers k and j are constant values deter-
mined taking target size into consideration. Therefore, instant
noise cannot influence on comparison and judgment due to
adaptive threshold level unlike just one constant threshold
level.
Integers k and j are both set to 20 using the data acquired
from the encounter simulation test which will be explained
3084
(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Photographs of (a)configurations of TX and RX antennas on the
cylindrical surface and (b) antenna assembly.
later. The number 20 corresponds to a distance of 10 m.
To verify the established numbers k and j , many runs of
real engagement simulation tests were carried out for the real
MiG-23 target Reflected signals from the real size MiG-23
target for various engagement conditions over 1,000 cases
were gathered. The algorithm was tested using the gathered
data As a result, the algorithm is proven to demonstrate the
successful detection of the target present above 10 m distance
with the size varying from 15 m to 20 m.
C. 2 Out of 2 Detection
Using the adaptive threshold, a Doppler signal larger than
the adaptive threshold level can trigger the fuze sensor. How-
ever, the sensor can be triggered by inadvertent noise such as
electrostatic discharge if single detection is employed. In order
to reduce possible false triggers, the 2 out of 2 algorithm is
employed. The 2 out of 2 algorithm accepts the target detection
if the Doppler signal larger than the adaptive threshold level
appears twice consecutively at the same direction and range
gate. The m out of n detection algorithm is frequently applied
to radars to lower the false alarm rate. Note that the fuze sensor
can detect a target 0.5 m behind after detecting the target if
the 2 out of 2 algorithm is applied; however, there is no effect
considering the target size.
IV. FABRICATION AND M EASUREMENT S ETUP
Figure 5(a) shows the transmitting and receiving antennas
placed on the cylindrical body for test. Figure 5(b) shows the
photo of the antenna assembly. The antenna is composed of the
radome and 2× 8 microstrip patch array antenna. The isolation
between TX and RX antennas is measured to be above 70 dB,
and the designed antenna beam pattern was found to be not
significantly affected.
Figure 6 shows the assembly of the transmitters and
receivers. They are built up by mounting and connecting
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO. 8, AUGUST 2013
Fig. 6. Photograph of the assembly of the transmitter and the receiver.
replaceable sub-component units on the housing. The subcom-
ponent units are separately constructed by assembling discrete
components and thin film substrates on a metallic carrier.
The Doppler filter is fabricated using op-amps in a separate
replaceable unit. The bandpass Doppler filter is constructed by
combining a high pass filter and a low pass filter and placed
on the back side of the housing.
The test based on real scenario is necessary to assess the
real performances of the developed fuze sensor. However,
such experiments cannot supply the required repeatability
or accuracy. In addition, the simulation or test using the
synthesized reflected signals which reflects the fuze sensor
environments is difficult to implement. In the short range, the
reflected signal from the target is generally affected by antenna
radiation pattern, encounter trajectory, and the type of target.
Consequently the reflected signal is difficult to implement. As
a result, an indoor encounter simulation test apparatus may be
appropriate in assessing the developed fuze sensor.
However, the implementable relative speed between the
fuze sensor and target is limited to about 1 m/s ∼ 2 m/s in
the indoor encounter simulation tests. The resulting Doppler
frequency becomes very low and estimated to be about
50 Hz ∼ 1 kHz. Thus, the Doppler filter in Fig. 1(a) was
replaced by 50 Hz ∼ 1 kHz band pass filter. The other parts are
independent of Doppler frequency and the algorithms remain
unchanged. Thus, the developed fuze sensor can be tested in a
lower Doppler frequency band and the performances of the
developed fuze sensor can be obtained through the indoor
encounter simulation test apparatus. In addition, a digital
camera and a laser range finder are loaded on the unmanned
car in order to record test conditions and environment.
The 14” standard sphere which has an omni-directional RCS
(Radar Cross Section) of –10 dBsm is used for the target of
the encounter simulation tests as shown in Fig. 7. The 14”
standard sphere is selected as the target because the analysis of
the measured results is easier compared with that of a complex
structure such as aircraft shape Furthermore, the performances
of the fuze sensor for other targets can be approximately
estimated using the results for the standard sphere.
Figure 8 shows the definitions of the geometrical parameters
for the standard sphere. In the test, direction θst d in Fig. 7(c)
CHOI et al.: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF A DIRECTION FINDING PROXIMITY FUZE SENSOR
(a)
(b) (c)
Fig. 7. Encounter simulation test apparatus test setup with the 14” standard
sphere target: (a) side, (b) rear views, (c) the definition of θstd for the direction
of the standard sphere.
Fig. 8. The definition of the geometrical parameters.
and height Z st d of the standard sphere in Fig. 8 are varied.
The characteristics of the range gates and the characteristics
of direction finding can be analyzed using the reflected sig-
nals. For efficient and automatic real time analysis, a viewer
program is also developed.
Figure 9 shows the window of the developed viewer pro-
gram. Digital camera images appear in the upper right corner
of the window as shown in Fig. 9. The digital camera is tilted
3085
Fig. 9. The viewer program window for verifying data acquisition results.
Fig. 10. Encounter simulation test with the 14” standard sphere and mesh
clutter.
by the same angle as the antenna tilt angle. Thus, we can see
which part of the target is illuminated by the main beam of
the antenna.
The left part window of Fig. 9 shows the range gated signal
data from Doppler filter outputs. The fuze sensor receives the
signals from the neighboring 3 receiving antennas (RX1, RX2,
and RX6). Each received signal is gated by the 3 delayed
codes and the 9 range gated signals (RX6-RG1, -RG2, -RG3),
(RX1-RG1, -RG2, -RG3) and (RX2-RG1, -RG2, -RG3) are
consequently produced. These data are collected in real time
and displayed by the viewer program. These data are also raw
data prior to A/D conversion and will be explained later. The
collected data can be analyzed and used as a raw data input to
a MatlabTM program. The measured range in the bottom left
corner of Fig. 9 represents Y in Fig. 8 which is measured by
a laser range finder in Fig. 7(a).
Figure 10 shows the mesh clutter for assessing the dis-
tinguishing capability of the fuze sensor in the clutter envi-
ronment at close range. The wire mesh was placed at about
9 m (corresponding to the distance which RG3 can detect)
away and the standard sphere was placed at about 1 m
(corresponding to RG1 detection range) away. In the case of
the square mesh, the wire grid needs a wire spacing of s<0.7λ
and an equivalent radius of the strips r = 0.014λ to have a
reflection coefficient larger than 0.9 for both TE and TM waves
when the angle of incidence θ is 0° ∼ 70° [24]. The wire
mesh used in the test has a wire spacing of s = 0.064λ and
a radius of r = 0.011λ which makes the reflection coefficient
almost 1.
3086
(a)
(b)
Fig. 11. Autocorrelation: (a) measured data for the step change of Z std and
(b) calculated results (removal of d 4 factor) from the measured data.
V. M EASURED R ESULTS
A. Autocorrelation
Firstly, autocorrelation characteristics, such as the main lobe
width, out-of range rejection, and existence of parasitic peaks
of the selected Legendre code for the fuze sensor are verified
from the experiment using the encounter simulation apparatus.
The autocorrelation depends on the time delay between the
received and transmitted codes, which in turn depends on
the range of the target. The range of the target is related to
direction angle θst d and height Z st d of the standard sphere
target shown in Fig. 7(c) and Fig. 8, respectively. The range is
altered by varying the height Z st d of the standard sphere from
0.4 m to 9.0 m with 0.2 m step and the direction angle θst d was
fixed at 0º. The unmanned car was made to move along the Y
direction repeatedly per every height change. Thus, a total of
44 measurement trials were performed for a 0.2 m step height
change. The 3 range-gated signals from the receiving antennas
RX1, RX2, and RX6 of three directions were collected while
the unmanned car was moving. The peak values of the 3 range-
gated signals for step changes of the height Z st d were recorded
in every measurement trial.
Figure 11(a) shows the peak values of 3 range gated signals
RG1, RG2 and RG3 of the receiving antenna RX1 for step
changes of the height Z st d . The signal RX1-RG1 becomes
smaller as the height Z st d increases because the strength of the
reflected signals becomes weaker. Also, the target goes further
away from RG1 as the height Z st d increases. On the contrary,
the other signals RX1-RG2 and RX1-RG3 show small peak
values when Z st d increases as the two range gated signals RG2
and RG3 are set to produce a larger degree of correlation at
longer ranges of 6 m and 9 m.
From the view point of the transmitting and receiving
antennas, the height Z st d does not correspond to the true range
because the antenna beams are tilted by θ as shown in Fig. 8.
IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO. 8, AUGUST 2013
The distance d in Fig. 8 becomes the true range. Thus, the true
range d can be obtained from Z st d /cos(θ ). In addition, to see a
true autocorrelation, the attenuation factor of the range (∝ d 4 )
should be compensated. The results are plotted in Fig. 11(b).
From Fig. 10(b), the autocorrelation shows triangular shape
of about 6 m width and the peaks of the autocorrelation are
found to appear at about 3 m, 6 m and 9 m, for RG1, RG2,
and RG3, respectively. Furthermore, the autocorrelations are
found to show no parasitic peak. The out-of-range rejection is
computed in dB scale and found to be about 40 dB. Theoretical
out-of-range rejection with 211-bit Legendre code of 20 ns
code width is about 46.5 dB. Thus, the out-of-range rejection
is degraded by about 6 dB.
The degradation of 6 dB out-of-range rejection is believed
to be caused by the unequal rise and fall times of the code [25].
Finite rising and falling times appear for the transition from
–1 to +1, or vice versa due to limited bandwidth. The rise and
fall times of the delayed code at the correlator input terminal
in Fig. 1(a) were measured to be 1. ns and 2.7 ns, respectively.
In addition, the rise and fall times of the received code increase
further due to the bandwidths of the LPF and the input lowpass
filter of the correlator which are about 1 GHz and 400 MHz
respectively. The waveform after the input lowpass filter of the
correlator cannot be measured. Thus the precise degradation
cannot be computed; however, the estimated rise and fall times
of the received code can be found to yield the degradation of
6 dB from the simulation. Depending on the difference of the
rise and fall times between the delayed and received codes,
the autocorrelation changed and a range of the degradation of
1 ∼ 6 dB is observed.
B. Range Detection and Direction Finding
To investigate the range detection and direction finding
capability of the fuze sensor, the experiment was conducted
setting θst d as 0° and Z st d as 1.6 m. The 3 range gated signals
at the Doppler filter output from antennas RX1, RX2, and RX6
are recorded for the single measurement trial. Figure 12(a)
shows the 3 signals from RX1, RX2, and RX6 with the same
range gate RG1. The signal from RX1 shows the largest
peak value because the antenna RX1 passes directly under
the standard sphere. The other antennas pass the sides of
the standard sphere and result in smaller received signals.
Ideally, the peak values should be equal; however, the signal
from RX6 is observed to be larger than that from RX2.
This may be caused by the asymmetry of the antenna beam
pattern in the azimuth direction and the gain difference of the
implemented receiver. This may affect the direction finding
resolution. To investigate the effects, the cylindrical body in
Fig. 5(a) is rotated for the RX2 antenna to receive more power
until the peak values from RX6 and RX2 became almost
equal. Almost equal power is observed at an angle of 15°
Considering the resolution angle of 30°, this is below the
resolution angle although the determined direction angle is
somewhat inaccurate with an error of 15°.
Figure 12(b) shows RX1 signals for the other range gates.
The RG1 signal is largest and the other range gated signals
are found to be small. Since Z st d is 1.6 m (d =2 m), this
CHOI et al.: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF A DIRECTION FINDING PROXIMITY FUZE SENSOR
(a)
(b)
Fig. 12. Collected data for the 14” standard sphere: (a) RX6, RX1, RX2
antennas at RG1 and (b) RG1, RG2, RG3 signals of the RX1 antenna.
Fig. 13. Direction finding results.
belongs to RG1 which shows peak at a range of about
3 m. Thus, the other range gated signals RG2 and RG3 are
observed to be small. In addition, the maximum detectable
range for the standard sphere is measured and the result is
found to be about 10.4 m.
The raw data in Fig. 12 are saved and the direction finding
algorithm was separately applied to the saved data using
MatlabTM . The saved data is converted to digital data through
A/D conversion at a variable sampling rate corresponding to
0.5m/3 determined by the relative speed. The adaptive thresh-
old level can be computed at each variable signal processing
time corresponding to 0.5 m range. The peak levels from
3 range gated signals for each antenna are then found and
compared with each adaptive threshold level at every 0.5 m. In
the case of two consecutive target detections, the receivers are
3087
Fig. 14. Measured data for the mesh clutter (without the 14” standard sphere
target).
Fig. 15. Measured data for the 14” standard sphere with the mesh clutter.
switched by the 3 antennas in the neighborhood of the antenna
where the peak level is detected and the direction of the target
is determined. Thus, the detection and direction finding are
completed after the fuze sensor progresses through a range of
1 m. Figure 13 is the sampled and A/D converted data per
0.5 m/3 for the results in Fig. 12(a). The threshold value Vt h
computed using equation (8) is also shown in Fig. 13. The
target was first detected at about Y= 4.2 m and direction was
found at about 3.2 m. The direction was the center of RX1
antenna as expected.
C. Detection of Multiple Targets
To investigate the distinguishing capability of the fuze
sensor in multi-target environments, tests were performed on
the condition that the standard sphere and mesh clutter were
placed in RG1 (d = 1 m) and in RG3 (9 m). Figure 14 shows
the test results for the mesh clutter placed in RG3 without the
standard sphere. The range gated signal RG3 from the receiv-
ing antenna RX1 shows the highest peak of about 215 mVpp
because the mesh clutter is placed at the range RG3 while the
range gated signals RG1 and RG2 show smaller peaks. In addi-
tion RG1 shows the smallest peak which is close to noise level.
Figure 15 shows the range gated signals from the receiving
antenna RX1 when the standard sphere target and mesh clutter
are placed at RG1 and RG3, respectively. As shown in Fig. 15,
the reflected signal from the standard sphere target in RG1
3088 IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL, VOL. 13, NO. 8, AUGUST 2013

TABLE II
C OMPARISON OF O THER T ECHNIQUE P ROXIMITY S ENSORS U SING M ICROWAVES
Advantage Disadvantage Remarks

CW [27] Moving target detection No distance information Lower cost

No direction information
FMCW Absolute distance Slow or fixed target detection Higher cost
[10], [11] No direction information Near Blind zone (order ∼m)
Complex FFT is required
*Correlation Fast target detection No absolute distance High cost
[6],[19], This Work Direction finding capability Range selection Possible

TABLE III
C OMPARISON OF M ICROWAVE P ROXIMITY F UZES U SING C ORRELATION
Hardware Operation Assessment of Developed Fuze
Direction Resolution Out-of Range Rejection
[6] None 32-bit PN code NA NA
[19] 90o 32-bit PN code Simple Threshold Detection NA
One range gate is used (15 dB SNR)
*This Work 30o 211-bit Legendre code ModifiedCFAR Indoor Encounter Simulation Test
3-Range gates are used Variable Signal processing Time 155mm Gun Firing Test (real sce-
2 out of 2 Algorithm nario)

is made stationary and a target is fired to pass the stationary

Fig. 16. Test result for the 155 mm gun firing.
appeared clearly in RG1 and has a peak value of 426 mVpp
while the reflected signal from the mesh clutter appears at
RG3. In general, the clutter signal appears at a wider range
because the reflected signal arrives from various distances of
clutter area. Thus, the result shows that the target and clutter
in each range gate can be clearly distinguished. Also, no
interference or distortion effect was observed.
D. 155 mm Gun Fire Test
The test method to verify the operation of the designed
fuze sensor in real scenario may be determined taking various
factors into consideration. One expensive way to test is to fire
the projectile with the fuze sensor at an air target, such as a
drone. If the drone is hit and destroyed the test becomes very
expensive as a result. On the contrary, in the event that the
projectile misses the drone, the projectile is never recovered
and there is no information whatsoever available as to the
reason for the miss. In addition, very little, if any, test data
is realized from this type of test. Thus, the method of testing
air target fuzing systems [26] was adopted as the test method
of the fuze sensor In this method, the designed fuze sensor
fuze. A 155 mm gun is used to fire the target at a speed
of 550 m/s To investigate the fuze sensor capability in target
detection and direction finding the height and direction of the
155 mm gun were changed. Doppler signal from each receiver
was collected using RS232 for analysis after the tests.
Among the indication lights yellow, blue, red, green and
grey which respectively represents the direction of target with
30° resolution (This corresponds to 5 direction angles of
the receiving antennas from RX2 to RX6 in Fig. 1(c) with
counterclockwise direction), one indication light was made to
flash when the 155 mm bullet was detected. The position of
target detection was measured by the visual record taken from
the high speed video camera.
Figure 16 shows a photo of the firing when the 155 mm gun
bullet was fired at the height of 3 m above the fuze sensor
in the vertical direction. As shown in Fig. 16, the red light
corresponding to the vertical direction was flashed. Thus, the
photograph shows that the 155 mm bullet of 550 m/s speed
was detected with a direction resolution of 30° . Repeated tests
showed that the designed fuze sensor successfully detects the
targets as well as their directions.
VI. C ONCLUSION
A direction finding proximity fuze sensor has been success-
fully developed. The fuze sensor uses code correlation tech-
nique. In the code correlation, BPSK modulation using Legen-
dre sequence is employed. The Doppler signal corresponding
to relative speed between the target and the fuze sensor can
be successfully extracted and the corresponding variable signal
processing time can be successfully determined.
Adaptive threshold target detection and 2 out of 2 detection
algorithm have been developed and applied to detect a target
accurately with a lower false alarm rate during the encounter.
After the target detection, the direction is found by comparing
CHOI et al.: DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT OF A DIRECTION FINDING PROXIMITY FUZE SENSOR
received powers with 30° resolution. The performances of the
implemented fuze sensor were assessed using the developed
encounter simulation test apparatus. The results showed that
the design is successful. Finally, the performances of the fuze
sensor were verified in a gun firing test, which is close to real
scenario. Through the gun firing test, the detection ability of
the fuze sensor as well as direction finding of the target is
successfully verified.
Table II shows comparison of proximity fuze sensors using
microwave. The technique employing CW and FMCW may
not be appropriate in application to detect fast target from the
air. The fuze sensor using the correlation technique seems to
be the best choice for the sensors using microwave. Table III
shows the comparison of this work with other proximity fuzes
employing the same techniques. Although the published results
are limited and few, the developed fuze sensor clearly shows
that the developed fuze sensor is a state of the art technology.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Brown, “The proximity fuze,” IEEE Aerosp. Electron. Syst. Mag.,
vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 3–10, Jul. 1993.
[2] L. Brown, “The origins of the proximity fuze,” in IEEE MTT-S Int.
Microw. Dig., Jun. 1998, pp. 425–428.
[3] M. A. Kolodny, “Radar proximity fuzing and the Cold War paradigm,”
in IEEE MTT-S Int. Microw. Dig., Jun. 2011, pp. 1–4.
[4] H. O. Nyongesa, S. Kent, and R. O’Keffe, “Genetic programming for
anti-air missile proximity fuze delay-time algorithms,” IEEE Aerosp.
Electron. Syst. Mag., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 41–45, Jan. 2001.
[5] Z. Zhang, X. Qu, D. Ma, D. Zhu, and L. Wang, “Anti-radiation missile
optimal detonation strategy study,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Syst. Inf., 2012,
pp. 1287–1289.
[6] M. D. Pollman, P. Katzin, B. Bedard, V. Aparin, W. Grammer, and
R. Orgusaar, “A MMIC radar chip for use in air-to-air missile fuzing
applications,” in Proc. IEEE Microw. Millim.-Wave Monolithic Circuits
Symp., Jun. 1996, pp. 185–188.
[7] A. Burdon, J. Mountford, and A. Garrod, “An air target engagement sim-
ulation for radar proximity fuze development and performance assess-
ment,” in Proc. IEE Colloq. Radar Syst. Model. (Ref. No. 1998/459),
Oct. 1998, pp. 3/1–3/7.
[8] L. Gan, H. Zhang, and X. J. Zhang, “Spot image processing and
simulation of the laser proximity fuze,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Image Anal.
Signal Process., 2011, pp. 159–162.
[9] Z. Xin, C. Zhanzhong, and X. Lixin, “Study on electrode potential of
capacitance proximity fuze,” in Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Electron. Meas.
Instrum., 2011, pp. 258–261.
[10] S. Fericean, A. Dorneich, R. Droxler, and D. Krter, “Development of a
microwave proximity sensor for industrial applications,” IEEE Sensors
J., vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 870–876, Jul. 2009.
[11] T. J. Baek, D. S. Ko, S. J. Lee, Y. H. Baek, M. Han, S. G. Choi,
J. H. Choi, W. J. Kim, and J. K. Rhee, “A transceiver module for
FMCW radar sensors using 94-GHz dot-type Schottky diode mixer,”
IEEE Sensors J., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 370–376, Feb. 2011.
[12] Z. Qing-hui and Z. Donglin, “Study on detonating control technique
of pseudo-noise code phase modulation fuze,” in Proc. 2nd Int. Congr.
Image Signal Process., 2009, pp. 1–5.
[13] Y. S. Kim, J. W. Jang, S. H. Kim, and J. S. No, “New construc-
tion of quaternary sequences with ideal autocorrelation from Legendre
sequences,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Symp. Inf. Theory, Jun.–Jul. 2009,
pp. 282–285.
[14] X. Tang and G. Gong, “New constructions of binary sequences with
optimal autocorrelation vaule/magnitude,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory,
vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 1278–1286, Mar. 2010.
[15] J. Jedwab and K. Yoshida, “The peak sidelobe level of families of binary
sequences,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 2247–2254,
May 2006.
[16] K. U. Schmidt, “Binary sequences with small peak sidelobe level,” IEEE
Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 2512–2515, Apr. 2012.
[17] D. V. Sarwate and M. B. Pursle, “Crosscorrelation properties of pseudo-
random and related sequences,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 593–619,
May 1980.
3089
[18] M. I. Skolnik, Radar Handbook, 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-
Hill, 1990, pp. 10–21.
[19] S. E. Craig, W. Fishbein, and O. E. Rittenbach, “Continuous-wave radar
with high range resolution and unambiguous velocity determination,”
IRE Trans. Military Electron., vol. MIL-6, no. 2, pp. 153–161, Apr. 1962.
[20] B. R. Mahfza, Radar Systems Analysis and Design Using MATLAB, 2nd
ed. London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall, 2005, pp. 286–287.
[21] D. Wu, Z. Ma, X. Wang, and H. Diao, “Hardware implementation of
a high-performance programmable digital processing system for radar
proximity fuze,” in Proc. CIE Int. Conf. Radar, 2011, pp. 974–977.
[22] J. Kan, K. Li, J. Tang, and X. Du, “Background modeling method
based on improved multi-Gaussian distribution,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Comput. Appl. Syst. Model., Oct. 2010, pp. V2-214–V2-218.
[23] G. K. Karagiannidis and A. S. Lioumpas, “An improved approximation
for the Gaussian Q-function,” IEEE Commun. Lett., vol. 11, no. 8,
pp. 644–646, Aug. 2007.
[24] C. G. Christodoulou and J. F. Kauffman, “On the electromagnetic
scattering from infinite rectangular grids with finite conductivity,” IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 144–154, Feb. 1986.
[25] F. E. Churchill, “Effect of unequal rise and fall times on the autocor-
relation function of a PN sequence,” Electron. Lett., vol. 26, no. 22,
pp. 1838–1840, Oct. 1990
[26] W. D. Greenless, “Method of testing air target fuzing systems,” U.S.
Patent 3 986 394, Oct. 19, 1976.
[27] Y. Ruike, L. Lei, Z. Pu, and L. Kexiang, “Influence of rain Doppler
frequency on MMW Doppler fuze,” in Proc. 9th IEEE Int. Symp.
Antennas Propag. EM Theory, Nov.–Dec. 2010, pp. 521–524.
Jae-Hyun Choi received the B.S. and M.S. degrees
in electronics from Chungnam National University,
Daejeon, Korea, in 1995 and 1997, respectively.
He has been with the Agency for Defense Devel-
opment, Daejeon, as a Senior Researcher, since
1998, where he has been responsible for design and
development of the transceiver for the proximity
fuze sensor. His current research interests include
miniaturized transceivers for small radar at close
range and millimeter-wave (MMW) radar/radiometer
for various fuzing systems.
Myung-Suk Jung received the Bachelor’s degree in
electronics and electrical engineering from Kyung-
Pook National University, Daegu, Korea, in 1999,
and the Master’s degree in electronics and electrical
engineering from the Pohang University of Science
and Technology, Pohang, Korea, in 2001.
She has been a Senior Researcher with the Agency
for Defense Development, Daejeon, Korea, since
2001. Her current research interests include develop-
ment of the microwave and millimeter-wave sensors.
Kyung-Whan Yeom (M’95) was born in Seoul,
Korea, in 1957. He received the B.S. degree in
electronics from Seoul National University, Seoul, in
1980, and the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical
engineering from the Korea Advanced Institute of
Science and Technology, Daejeon, Korea, in 1982
and 1988, respectively.
He was with LG Precision, as a Principal Engineer,
from 1985 to 1991. He was with MIC Team as a
Team Leader and involved subsequently in military
electronics division for EW equipments. From 1991
to 1995, he was with LTI, where he was involved with power amplifier
modules for analog cellular phones. He joined Chungnam National University,
Daejeon, Korea, as an Assistant Professor, in 1995. He is currently a Professor
with the Department of Radio Science and Engineering, Chungnam National
University. His current research interests include the design of hybrid and
monolithic microwave circuits and microwave systems. He is a member of
the Korean Institute of Electromagnetic Engineering and Science (KIEES).
He was the Editor-In-Chief for KIEES from 2004 to 2006. He received the
IR-52 Jang Youg-Sil Prize from MOST of Korea for his work on cell phone
power amplifiers in 1994. He received the Academic Award from KIEES for
“Design and fabrication of a novel 60 GHz GaAs pHEMT resistive double
balanced star MMIC mixer” in 2004.