IMPACT OF T/R MODULE PERFORMANCE ON

TRADEOFF DESIGN OF AIRBORNE AESA RADAR

Jie-Li Zhu1,2, Hong-Yu Gu1,2, Deng-Feng Zhang1,2, Xiang Yang1,2
1
Radar Research (Beijing), Leihua, Electronic Technology Institute, AVIC, China
2
Aviation Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on AISSS
zhujl, guhy, zhangdf, yangxiang@ravic.cn
Keywords: T/R module, power-aperture product, peak-to- the performance requirement of T/R modules given the
side lobe ratio. desired PAP and PSLR performance of a radar system.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The prob-
Abstract lem is described in Section 2, the proposed procedure is
introduced in details in Section 3, consequently, a tradeoff
Transmit/Receive (T/R) modules are key components in design with a demonstration based on the state-of-art per-
Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) for ad- formance parameters of T/R modules is presented in Sec-
vanced airborne radar, and their performance affects the tion 4, and the final section is the conclusion of this paper.
capability of airborne AESA radar in several aspects. In
this paper, a procedure is proposed with the tradeoff de- 2 Problem Description
sign of an AESA radar between the power-aperture prod-
uct (PAP) and the peak-to-side lobe ratio (PSLR) of its Let us consider an airborne AESA radar tradeoff design
antenna. While the PAP decides the maximum detection problem where both high PAP and PSLR are required.
range, the PSLR is desired for low probability of intercept The manufacturing consistency of T/R modules, as well as
(LPI) radars as well as for alleviating clutter interference. the manufacturing errors of antenna array elements, is
The analysis results indicate that both high PAP and ignored here for the sake of simplicity.
PSLR can not be achieved simultaneously based on the Amplitude-weighted window is employed to achieve high
state-of-art performance of Ku-band T/R modules. PSLR due to closely spaced antenna array elements.
This leads to the fact that the transmit path of T/R mod-
1 Introduction ules should operate in its linear region. Although phase-
weighted window can also reduce the sidelobe level, it
Both high power-aperture product (PAP) and low peak-to- usually does not meet the PLSR requirement of airborne
side lobe ratio (PSLR) are favoured for airborne fire con- radars due to its limited performance [3].
trol radars. The PAP is related to the maximum range of a The transmit path of a T/R module is characterized here
radar, and the PSLR is desired for achieving low probabil- by three parameters: output power at 1dB compression
ity of intercept (LPI) performance as well as alleviating point P1dB; attenuation quantization length 1bit and step
clutter interference. size δ dB, where the attenuation range AR = (2l-1)·δ refer-
For advanced Active Electronically Scanned Array ring to Fig.1.
(AESA) radar, both its PAP and PSLR depend on the per-
Po /dBm

formance of transmit/receive (T/R) modules. Moreover,

these two factors conflict with each other. In order to saturation
achieve the highest PAP for a given array size, all T/R region
P1dB 1dB
modules must transmit signal with saturation output pow-
er [1]. To obtain a high PSLR, amplitude weighting is 1dB compress ion
frequently used for X/Ku-band airborne radar due to its linear point
short wavelength [2, 3]. This leads to the fact that most region
T/R modules in the array must transmit signal with an
output power less than 1dB compression output power
P1dB. In other words, the PAP of a radar will be dramati-
cally reduced when a high PSLR is pursued. Hence, it is
crucial for radar system design to analyze the trade space Pi /dBm
between the achievable PAP and PSLR performance of a
Figure 1. Transmit Path Characteristic Curve of T/R
radar.
Module.
In this paper, a procedure is proposed to facilitate this
tradeoff design problem of AESA radars. This work is Let Po, max DžP1dB represents the maximum output power
valuable for radar system in two aspects. On one hand, it among all T/R modules transmit paths in an AESA array,
can be used to predict the PAP and PSLR performance for the total transmit power PT can be expressed as
an AESA radar given the performance parameters of T/R
modules. On the other hand, it can also be used to deduce
 M N

Po , m ax ¦ ¦w (1)
2
PT mn
m 1 n 1 Optimize PAP norm Digital attenuator
parameters setting
where wmn is the amplitude weighted coefficient of the PSLRr with
(l bit, δdB)
continuous weights
element in the array indexed by (m, n). The weighted co-
efficient wmn can be further written as Compute indexes with
 K m n /10 quantized weights
wmn 10 (2)
where
l 1
PSLRm,PAPnorm
G ¦ 2 b m , n , i , b m , n , i  {0,1} (3)
i
K mn
i 0 PAPcopt
The effective aperture of an amplitude-weighted array is PSLRr-PSLRm<∆ No
[4, 5] PAPnorm ≥ α PAPcopt
M N

(¦ ¦w
2
mn
) Yes
KO
2

Ae ˜ m 1 n 1
M N
(4)
4
¦¦w
2
PAPqopt
mn
m 1 n 1

where η and λ are the efficiency factor of antenna element PAPr

Compute 1dB
and the wavelength, respectively. compression point

Hence, the PAP can be expressed as

PAP PT Ae
2
Po , m ax ˜ PAPnorm (5) P1dB lopt , δopt

where Feasiblity Check Requirement Analysis

M N

(¦ ¦
2
wmn )
K O
2 4
Figure 2. Flowchart of Tradeoff Design.
P A Pnorm m 1 n 1
M N
˜ (6)
16 analyzing the requirement to the performance of TR mod-
¦¦w
2
mn
m 1 n 1 ules. It is worth mentioning that, although the procedure
It is worth to note that PAP depends on the all three introduced here is from the viewpoint of requirement
aforementioned T/R module parameters, and that PAPnorm analysis to TR module, it can be used to facilitate the
is only decided by the two digital attenuator parameters. PAP-PSLR tradeoff design after slightly modification.
The PSLR definition of an antenna array is based on the The detailed procedure is described as follows.
array gain. The antenna gain can be expressed as A. Feasibility Check
| A F (T , I ) |
2 The continuous amplitude weights are designed firstly
G D (T , I ) (7) according to the demands of PSLR. Since Taylor
1 2S S

³ ³ |A F (T , I ) | sin T d T d I
2
weighting for sum beam has almost become an industry
4S 0 0
standard, the continuous Taylor function is used as ideal
where weights in this paper.
M N 2S
j ª ( m  1) d x sin T cos I  ( n  1) d y sin T sin I º
Taylor pattern which could be expressed as
¦¦ O ¬ ¼
A F (T , I ) wmn e (8) n 1

sin( S x ) – (1  x / x n )
m 1 n 1 2 2

AF(θ, ϕ) is the far-field array factor if the main beam (θ0,

ϕ0) points to the normal direction of array. S ( x, A, n ) co sh ( S A ) n 1
n 1
,
S x – (1  x / n )
2 2
Consequently, the PSLR can be expressed as
G D (T 0 , I 0 )
n 1 (11)
P S LR (9) ­ 2 2
m ax G D (T , I ) A  (n  1 / 2)
°rn , n d n 1
( T ,I ):
xn ®
2
A  (n  1 / 2)
2

where °
¯ rn nt n
w G D (T , I )
2

: { (T , I ) | 0} (T 0 , I 0 ) (10) is determined by both the maximum sidelobe level

wTwI SLL=20lg(coshπA) and parameter n , which are set as
and ·\· represents the minus operation. variables here. The constraint is set as
PSLR r - PSLR m  ' (12)
3 Tradeoff Design Procedure where PSLRr is the desired PSLR and PSLRm is the meas-
ured PSLR, and the objective function for optimization is
In this section, the proposed procedure will be described to maximize PAPnorm. The optimal PAPnorm is denoted by
in details to solve the tradeoff problem mentioned in pre- PAPcopt, and the attenuation range occupied by its corre-
vious sections. sponding continuous weights is denoted by ARc.
The procedure consists of two steps: the first step is B. Requirement Analysis
checking the feasibility of system requirements without The digital attenuator parameters l and δ are set as design
considering the performance of TR modules, the second is variables, and those continuous amplitude weights which
satisfies PSLR requirement are quantified by up or down
way randomly---the method proposed in [6]. The mini-
mum digit lopt and its corresponding δopt could be found by
using PSLRm and PAPnorm with constraints. In addition to
the constraint of PSLR that described in Eq. (12), the con-
straint condition further comprises
PAPnorm t D PA copt (13)
where Ĕ should be set close to 1. Note that if the con-
straints are too strict, for example ∆=0dB, Ĕ=1, then the
numerical optimization of lopt may be very large or the
values which satisfy the constraints for some δ might not
exist. In order to obtain a reasonable configuration, the
constraints should be relaxed slightly.
The optimal PAPnorm which is computed according to lopt
and δopt, is denoted by PAPqopt, and the attenuation range
occupied by the quantized weights is ARqDž(2lopt-1)·δopt.
Considering the requirement of PAP, the minimum P1dB of
T/R module could be calculated according to Eq. (5).
the PSLRm. Fig.3 shows that higher PSLRr requires great-
er attenuation range, however the corresponding PAPcopt
that could achieve is smaller. Therefore, the digital attenu-
ator of T/R module must be rationally designed to mini-
mize the losses caused by weight quantization and attenu-
ation range limitation.
The common attenuation step of a digital attenuator is
0.5dB at present, while the corresponding digit of X/Ku-
band radar generally equals 6bit [8], and the digit capabil-
ity of Ka-band radar equals 5bit [9]. The vector modulator
is similar to digital attenuator with smaller step, while its
attenuation range is relatively small which usually equals
5~10dB. The ergodic optimization idea is used here that
multiple digital attenuation parameters are set to find the
optimal configuration which meets the constraints.

4 A Tradeoff Design Demonstration

Considering a rectangular array, in which M = 90, N = 60,
dx = dy = λ/2 = 1cm. For the sake of simplicity, η is set to 1.
Based on the boundary conditions of different sidelobe
levels which are shown in Table 1 [7], set PSLRr equals to
30dB, 40dB and 50dB, which represent the low sidelobe,
very-low sidelobe and ultra-low sidelobe respectively. The
border between the very-low sidelobe and ultra-low side-
lobe is taken into consideration as well.
Table 1. Sidelobe Level Definitions. Figure 4. Optimal Configuration of Digital Attenuator.
Type PSLR(dBc) Set δ  {0.1,0.2,...,1}, l  {5,6,7,8,9}, ∆=1dB and Ĕ
=
ordinary >-25 0.95, the optimal results are shown in Fig.4. The ordinate
low -25~-35 is the minimum attenuation digit, which satisfies the con-
very-low -35~-45 straints that listed in Eq. (12) and (13), while the abscissa
ultra-low <-45 represents the attenuation step. Note that any attenuation
digit will not satisfies the constraints if δ is larger than 0.5
when PSLRr = 50dB.
Fig.4 shows that 'δ = 0.5dB and l = 6bit' is the optimal
configuration for very-low sidelobe, which indicates that
the common configuration of T/R module at present can
meet the demand of low and very-low sidelobe. Increasing
the attenuation digit of T/R module to 7bit helps to
achieve ultra-low sidelobe, and the corresponding attenua-
tion range satisfies the dynamic range demand of continu-
ous weights in Fig.3.
Table 2. Optimal Results with Quantized Weights
(δ=0.5dB).
PSLRr l PSLRm PAPqopt PAPcopt
30dB 6bit 30.03dB 23.50dB 23.30dB
40dB 6bit 40.22dB 20.07dB 20.05dB
Figure 3. Optimal PAP with Continuous Weights. 45dB 6bit 44.13dB 18.46dB 18.68dB
The simulation results that meet PSLR constraint based on 45dB 7bit 45.00dB 18.75dB 18.68dB
Taylor continuous weights are shown in Fig.3. The left 50dB 7bit 50.15dB 17.20dB 17.43dB
ordinate is the maximum PAPnorm that can be achieved and Based on the optimal configuration of digital attenuator
the right ordinate is the attenuation range occupied by for different PSLR and set ∆=1dB, the optimal results
continuous power weights, while the abscissa represents which satisfy the constraint are shown in Table 2. Table 2
shows that PAPqopt with optimal quantized weights can [4] Wirth, W.D., “Radar Techniques Using Array An-
approach PAPcopt with optimal continuous weights while tennas”, The Institution of Electrical Engineers,
both satisfy the PSLR constraint. London: United Kingdom, 2001.
[5] Skolnik, M.I., “Radar handbook”, McGraw-Hill,
2008.
[6] Gao, T., Li, J. and Guo, Y., “Design and analysis of
multi-step amplitude quantization weighted 2-D sol-
id-state active phased array antennas”, Journal of
Electronics, 1994, 11, pp. 71-78.
[7] Schrank, H.E., “Low Sidelobe Phased Array Anten-
nas”, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society
Newsletter, 1983, pp. 5-8.
[8] Zhao, L. and Du, X.H., “A Design of X Band T/R
Module with the Function of Amplitude Weighted”,
Chinese Journal of Electron Devices, 2014, 37, pp.
1072-1075.
[9] Zhai, K.Y. “Research of Ku-band phased array re-
ceiver module based on multi-chip assembly tech-
nology”. PhD thesis, Nanjing University of Science
Figure 5. PAPmax versus P1dB. and Technology, 2013.
The curves of the maximum PAP with P1dB based on
PAPqopt with the constraint of PSLR are shown in Fig.5.
The three different curves are obtained in the case of low
sidelobe, very-low sidelobe and ultra-low sidelobe respec-
tively. It can be seen from Fig.5 that given a constant P1dB,
increasing PSLR will result in smaller PAP.
Furthermore, we consider a pratical radar system in which
a 66dBm PAP is required at least to detect targets at
200km. To this end, the P1dB must be greater than 50dBm
for AESA array herein. The saturated output power of T/R
module that commonly used in airborne radar approxi-
mates 40dBm [8], which indicates that the largest PAP is
no more than 66dBm when operating at any level of low
sidelobe. In other words, P1dB of T/R module must be im-
proved to achieve the required PAP and PSLR without
adjusting waveform design and signal processing.

5 Conclusion

A method is proposed in this paper to address the PAP-

PSLR tradeoff design problem in airborne AESA radars.
Further analysis is carried out based on the state-of-art
performance of TR modules, and analysis results indicate
that high PAP and PSLR can not be achieved simultane-
ously.

References
[1] Zhou, W.X., “Application of wide band-gap semi-
conductor power devices in modern radar”, Modern
Radar, 2010, 32, pp. 1-6.
[2] Yan, Q.F., Fan, G.P. and Xu C.Y., “Study of low
side lobe technique with phase-only on linear ar-
rays”, Shipboard Electronic Countermeasure, 2009,
32, pp. 52-55.
[3] Lynch, D.J., “Introduction to RF Stealth”, SciTech
Publishing Inc., 2004.