Design of Ultra broadband Radar Cross Section Reduction Surfaces using Artificial Magnetic Conductors Amit Kumar Singh and Anjini Kumar Tiwary Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering,Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi – 835 [email protected], [email protected]: A comprehensive approach aimed to reduce radar cross section using checker board surface when compared to PEC over an ultra-broadband frequency range is discussed.
Using the unique phase property of electromagnetic band gap structure to change the direction of scattered field of target, a planar surface comprises of two AMC’S has been designed. A single band unit cell of AMC1 and dual band unit cell of AMC2 has been investigated. An ultra-broadband reduction in RCS is achieved by adopting the methodology of designing the two artificial magnetic conductor (AMC’s), i.
We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!
e., to have a reflection phase of 00 at separate frequencies, suitably chosen to achieve reduction in RCS in the desired frequency band. The checker board configuration is formed by two different AMC’S with 1800±370 phase difference over more than 99% frequency bandwidth (3.6 GHz to 10.
7 GHz). A 10 dB reduction in RCS is observed over the frequency range of 3.78 GHz to 10.7 GHz, which is more than 95% of frequency bandwidth. The maximum Radar cross section reduction is 32.5 dB. The predicted and simulated data show an excellent agreement. Modeling and simulation are done in Microwave Studio by Computer Simulation Technology (CST).
Keywords: Artificial Magnetic Conductor, Electromagnetic Band gap, Perfect Electric Conductor, Radar Cross Section, Perfect Electric Conductor. I. IntroductionElectromagnetic waves are reflected if they meet an electrically leading surface. If these waves are received again at the place of origin, then that means an obstacle is in the propagation direction. The principle of radar works by transmitting an electromagnetic (EM) wave and detecting a reflected echo from the target. If there is a target present with sufficient signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), then detection is declared. Every target has a signature. In the radar world, this signature is known as the radar cross section (RCS).
The RCS is the collective scattering from all the contributors on the platform. Development of modern stealth platform gives tough challenge to reduce RCS of the carrier. Many methods have been employed in the past to reduce RCS such as adding Radar Absorbent Material, changing target’s geometry in order to direct the scattered waves away from the reflected path. On the other hand, one can easily find out that with some special reflection coatings printed on an object the reflected EM wave can further be reduced. As mentioned above, geometry alteration is another widely used option for RCS reduction. The primary objective in geometry alteration is to redirect scattered waves away from the backscattered direction.
However, it may compromise performance in terms of aerodynamics. One feasible solution is to utilize artificial impedance surfaces which can redirect scattered waves without altering the geometry of the target. It has been shown in 3 that when a checkerboard patterned artificial impedance surface is designed using an AMC structure in combination with a PEC structure destructive interference is created due to the 180_ phase difference between the reflected fields from each of the two elements.
This enables RCS reduction by the checkerboard surface as compared to that of a PEC surface of the same size; scattered fields are redirected in four directions (in the four quadrants). The angular directions of these four lobes can be determined approximately using array theory according to 6, 7. The checkerboard design results in thin surfaces with very low RCS as compared to bulky, lossy materials or Salisbury surfaces 8. Others have applied a similar approach to reduce the radar signature and increase the gain of antennas 9–13. In 14, However, it is well known that AMC technology is band limited 28, 29; thus the 10-dB RCS reduction bandwidth is also band confined. Using a combination of two properly designed AMC structures, instead of a combination of AMC and PEC, a more broadband RCS reduction can be achieved 15II. DESIGN OF PROPOSED CHECKERBOARD STRUCTURE This section describes about the design configuration of proposed checkerboard surface, which uses a combination of single and dual band Artificial Magnetic Conductor (AMC). For all the simulation purpose, CST MWS software is used.
Here, AMC structures is designed on Rogers RT/duroid-5880 substrate whose dielectric constant = 2.2, thickness = 6.35 mm and followed by a PEC ground plane. Following are the design steps for the proposed checkerboard structure.A.Design of single band unit cell artificial magnetic conductorSquare patch has been taken as the single band AMC in the proposed check board design as it provides an excellent broad frequency band 1.
Once the size of the unit cell is fixed as shown in Fig. 1(a), it has only one design parameter, the length of the patch (x), which influences the frequency of the first resonance, as shown in Fig 1(b).2749550660400012065018034000(a) (b) Fig 1(a) and (b): Unit cell of AMC1 and its Reflection phase diagramFig. 1(b) shows the impact of the different patch length on the resonance frequency.
It depicts that on increasing patch length resonance frequency shift towards lower value of frequency as shown in Tab Table 1: Resonance frequency corresponding to different patch lengthPatch length (x) (mm) Resonance frequency (GHz)4.96 7.66 77 6.58 5.8B. Design of dual band unit cell artificial magnetic conductor.
Different methodologies have been examined for multiband artificial magnetic surface 2. Dual band AMC is designed by using two square patches that has been amalgamated as shown in Fig 2. In the proposed design the outer length (v) of patch is responsible for first resonance as shown in Fig 3(b), and inner length (u) is responsible for second resonance as shown in Fig 3(a).
143891018923000344297051562000 Fig 2: Unit cell of AMC 2-88905143500(a) Fig 3 (b) Fig 3: Impact of (a) u and (b) v on the reflection phase of unit cell of AMC 2 Table 2: Effect of length (in mm) on Resonance frequency (in GHz)Inner length(u) Outer length(v) FuFv7 13 9 3.26 12.5 9.8 3.65 12 10.8 44 11.
5 11.4 4.3It is necessary to control the second resonant frequency without altering the first resonant frequency, and vice versa, so that a robust control of the bandwidth of the 10-dB RCS reduction can be realized. These requirements can be met by a very basic design which is a combination of an inner patch and an outer ring, as shown in Fig 2.
In the proposed amalgamated design, a square patch and a square ring are considered. The outer ring of dimensions (v) being the larger element, is primarily responsible for the first resonance, while the smaller inner patch (of dimension u) for the second resonance.C.Design of AMC1 and AMC2Design of two AMC1 and AMC2 has been proposed as shown in Fig 4 in order to satisfy phase difference of (1800±370) 1. It is expected to have 10 dB RCS reduction in the frequency range satisfying phase difference (1800±370).2970530571500288290508000 (b)Fig 4 (a) and (b) : Design of AMC 1 and AMC 2.Here, the AMC structures are designed on a standard Rogers RT/duroid-5880 dielectric substrate (thickness = 6.
35 mm, dielectric constant = 2.2) backed by a PEC ground plane.The dimension of unit cell of AMC’S is given in Table 3. Table 3: Dimensions for AMC1 and AMC2Design parameter DimensionX 4.98U 4.20V 11.
50101219048387000The dimension listed in Table 3 satisfies the phase difference condition for a 99.30% fractional bandwidth in the frequency range 3.6 GHz to 10.7 GHz.
Fig 4. Phase reflection as a function of frquency for both AMC1 and AMC2To achieve broadband RCS reduction using checkerboard surfaces, one should first optimize the checkerboard surface with two single band AMCs. Once it is optimized, one of these AMCs should be converted to dual band AMC to achieve greater RCS reduction bandwidth.Therefore, a design to achieve broadband RCS reduction using checkerboard surfaces is to combine single and dual band AMCs. The frequencies at which the minimum reflection phase difference of 1430 occurs (necessary for at least 10-dB RCS reduction) are indicated in Fig 4.by black vertical line. In fig 18 Phase reflection of AMC 1 and AMC 2 and satisfy 99.
30% bandwidth for RCS reduction.III. ANALYSIS OF CHECKERBOARDSURFACEIn this section we will analyze the mechanism of checker board surfaces. It is based on the principle that the scattered fields will cancel and form different scattering patterns when the phase difference of the reflected fields between the two structures is180 0.
RCS reduction can be approximated by array theory 3. Checker board structure consists of four elements, two AMC1 and two AMC2 and arrange as shown in Fig 5. Here, it is worth noting that the size of AMC super cell doesn’t affect the RCS reduction performance in the normal direction. However, it determines the angular direction of the maxima (?) of the scattered fields, which can be determined using basic array theory.
Therefore, the size of the AMC supercells should always be selected incorporating the above factor.356870768350031000707683500 (a) (b) Fig 5: Combination of AMC1 and AMC2 forming a square checkerboard (a) 3-D view (b) Top viewThe checkerboard surface can be considered as a planar array with a progressive phase shift of around 180?. Array factor can be represented by equation 1 for this ground plane. The phases of the two AMC structures, as well as the phase difference between them, are plotted in Fig 4.AF=n=1Nej(n-1)(klxsin? cos?+?x)* k=0nej(n-1)(kly sin? sin?+?y) (1)Where, ?x and ?y represents progressive phase shift in the x and y direction respectively.
Ix and ly represents distance between the element in the x and y direction respectively.Principal maxima directed along ?0, ?0 can be found using equation tan?0=?ylx/?xly (2) sin?2=(?xklx)2+ (?ykly)2 (3) QUOTE tan?o=?ylx/?xly The RCS reduction of a scattering surface, compared to perfect electric conductor is given byRCS reduction = 10log|Es|2/ 10log|Ei|2 (4)For a dual AMC check board structures, RCS reduction is given by the equation.RCS reduction = 10 logB1ejQ1+B2ejQ2/2 (5)Where B1 and B2 are the reflection coefficient amplitudes of the two AMC structures, and Q1 and Q2 are their reflection phases.Ratio of scattered field and the incident field is called reflection coefficient of the surface. Each AMC’S occupy half area of the check board surface as shown in Fig. 5. So reflection coefficient of check board surface is the average reflection coefficient of the two AMC structure.
Hence equation 5 provides a good calculation for RCS reduction for a dual band compared to that of a PEC plane as it doesn’t include the edge effect. Therefore, at least 10 dB RCS reduction can be achieved using a checkerboard surface when the reflection phase difference between the two constitutive artificial magnetic conducting elements is (180°± 37°). Fig 6: RCS response of Checkerboardsurface for normal incidence.Fig 6. shows the RCS response of Checker board surface for normal incidence, here the response shows the fractional bandwidth A 10-dB RCS reduction occurs, in the ideal case of an infinite checkerboard surface, within 1800 ± 370 phase difference between the two AMC’s structures. The RCS reduction of the checkerboard surface, compared to the RCS of a metal plate, can be approximated by (5). Thus, the predicted RCS reduction as a function of frequency is illustrated in Fig.
6, and it exhibits a 10-dB reduction over a wider frequency band of 3.78-10.7 GHz, which is 95.5% in good agreement with the predicted response as discussed in Table 4.
Table 4Design Frequency Band (GHz) 10 dB RCS reduction B.W (Simulated) 10 dB RCS reduction B.W (Measured)36 14.5 – 21.
8 N/A 40.22%37 13.2 – 24.2 58.5% N/A38 5.
1 – 7.6 N/A 32%39 9.5 – 15.8 N/A 50%1 3.75 – 10 91% 91%Purposed design Fig. 5 3.78-10.
7 95.5% N/AIn Table 4: a comparison between the 10-dB RCS reduction bandwidth of the proposed checkerboard and the other known wideband checkerboard designs is presented. It is apparent that our proposed novel checkerboard design has the superior 10-dB RCS reduction bandwidth.IV. CONCLUSIONThe checkerboard surface, combining two different designs of AMC’S structures (AMC1 and AMC2), were designed and simulated with CST Microwave Studio. A brief discussion on the proper selection of AMCs to achieve Ultra-broad bandwidth is given. It is showed that a wider 10-dB RCS reduction bandwidth (3.78-10.
7 GHz) of over 95.5% is obtained by combining two different types of AMC’S structures comprises of the square and amalgamated square surfaces. The phase reflection curve of two AMC’s shows excellent agreement with 10-dB RCS reduction. The analytical expression of (5) provides a good design guideline of 10-dB RCS reduction of a dual AMC checkerboard surface compared to the corresponding PEC, and it has been verified with simulations of the subject designs. References:1 A. Y.
Modi, C. A. Balanis, and C. Birtcher, “AMC cells for Broadband RCS Reduction Checkerboard Surfaces,” 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation (APSURSI), San Diego, CA, pp.
1915 1916, July 2017.2 D. J. Kern, D. H. Werner, A.
Monorchio, L. Lanuzza, and M. J. Wilhelm, “The design synthesis of multiband artificial magnetic conductors using high impedance frequency selective surfaces,” IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propag., vol. 53, no.
1, pp. 8 – 17, 20053 C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design, 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 20054 M. E. de Cos, Y.
Alvarez, and F. Las-Heras, “A novel approach for RCS reduction using a combination of artificial magnetic conductors,” Prog. Electromagn. Res.
, vol. 107, pp. 147–159, 2010.5 W.
Chen, C. A. Balanis, and C. R. Birtcher, “Checkerboard EBG surfaces for wideband radar cross section reduction,” IEEE Trans.
Antennas Propag., vol. 63, no. 6, pp.
2636 – 2645, June 20156 J. C. I.
Galarregui, A. T. Pereda, J. L. M. de Falc on, I. Ederra, R. Gonzalo, and P.
de Maagt, “Broadband radar cross-section reduction using AMC technology,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 6136 – 6143, 2013.7.
C. A. Balanis, Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design, 4th ed., Hoboken,NJ, USA: Wiley, 2016.8 W. W. Salisbury, “Absorbent body for electromagnetic waves,” U.
S. Patent 2599944, June 10, 1952.C.9 Huang, W. Pan, X.
Ma, B. Jiang and X. Luo, “Wideband radar cross section reduction of a stacked patch array antenna using metasurface,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol.
14, pp. 1369 – 1372, 2015.10 Y. J. Zheng, J. Gao, X. Y.
Cao, S. J. Li, and W. Q. Li, “Wideband RCS reduction and gain enhancement microstrip antenna using chessboard configuration superstrate,” Microw. Opt. Technol.
Lett., vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 1738 – 1741, 2015.11 Y. Jia, Y. Liu, Y.
J. Guo, K. Li, and S.-X. Gong, “Broadband polarization rotation reflective surfaces and their application on RCS reduction.,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol.
64, no. 1, pp. 179 – 188, 2016. 12 S. Zhang, “Novel dualband compact HIS and its application of reducing array in band RCS,” Microw. Opt.
Technol. Lett., vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 700 – 704, 2016. 13 Y. Liu, K.
Li, Y. Jia, Y. Hao, S.
Gong, and Y. J. Guo, “Wideband RCS reduction of a slot array antenna using polarization conversion metasurfaces,” IEEE. Trans Antennas Propag., vol.
64, pp. 326 – 331.14 Y. Zhang, R.
Mittra, and B. Z. Wang, “Novel design for low-RCS screens using a combination of dual-AMC,” Proc. of IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas Propag.
, Charleston, June 2009, pp. 1 – 4.15 Y. Fu, Y. Li, and N. Yuan, “Wideband composite AMC surfaces for RCS reduction,” Microwave. Opt. Technol.
Lett., vol. 53, pp. 712 – 715, 2011.16 A. Edalati, K.
Sarabandi, “Wideband, wide angle, polarization independent RCS reduction using non absorptive miniaturized element frequency selective surfaces,” IEEE Trans, Antennas Propagation., vol. 62, no.
2, pp. 747 – 754, 2014.17 Y. Zhang, R. Mittra, B. Z. Wang, and N.-T.
Huang, “AMCs for ultra-thin and broadband RAM design,” Electron. Letter., vol.
45, no. 10, pp. 484 –485, May 2009.18 M. K.
T. Al-Nuaimi and W. Hong, “Monostatic RCS reduction at mm waves,” 2015 Asia-Pacific Microwave Conference (APMC), Nanjing, IEEE, 2015, pp. 1-3.19 W. Pan, C. Huang, M.
Pu, X. Ma, J. Cui, B. Zhao, and X. Luo, “Combining the absorptive and radiative loss in metasurfaces for multispectral shaping of the electromagnetic scattering,” Scientific Reports, no. 6, 2016.20 M. K.
T. Al-Nuaimi, W. Hong, and X.
Gao, “Low-Cost Dielectric Reflective Surface for Low-Level Backscattered Diffuse Reflections,” Journal of Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 155 – 165, 2017.21 Y. Zheng, J. Gao, L. Xu, X.
Cao, and T. Liu, “Ultra-wideband and Polarization Independent Radar Cross Section Reduction with Composite Artificial Magnetic Conductor Surface,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol.
16, pp. 1 – 4, 2017.22 A. Ghayekhloo, M. Afsahi and A.
A. Orouji,”Checkerboard Plasma Electromagnetic Surface for Wideband and Wide-Angle Bistatic Radar Cross Section Reduction,” IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science, vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 603 – 609, 2017.
23 ANSYS, Inc., Canonsburg, PA, USA Online.24 http://www.aewa.org/Library/rf_bands.html.25http://www.
rfcafe.com/references/electrical/ew-radar-handbook/radar-cross-section.htm.26 David C. Jenn, Radar and Laser Cross Section Engineering, Ohio: AIAA Education Series, 1995.27 J.W. Crispin, A.
L. Maffett, “The Radar Cross Section of Surface Effect Ships,” Report APL SES-001, Applied Physics Laboratory, John Hopkins University, December 1972.28.Eugene F. Knott, “Radar Cross Section”, Radar Handbook, McGraw-Hill, 199029 W.W. Salisbury, Absorbent Body for Electromagnetic Waves, US Patent 2, 599, 944, June 1952.
Shaeffer, M.T. Tuley, E.
F. Knott, Radar Cross Section, SciTech Publishing, 2004.31 William D. Callister, Materials Science and Engineering, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2003.32 C. A.
Balanis, Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2012.33 Sievenpiper, D., “High-impedance electromagnetic surfaces,” Ph.
D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, 199934 Sievenpiper, D., L. Zhang, R. F. J.
Broas, N. G. Alexopolous, and E. Yablonovitch, “High-impedance electromagnetic surfaces with a forbidden frequency band,” IEEE Trans.
Microwave Theory Tech., Vol. 47, No.
11 2059–2074, 1999.35 Computer Simulation Technology, CST Microwave Studio – Getting Started, Computer Simulation Technology, Darmstadt (Germany), pp. 4–6, 2005.36 J.C.I.
Galarregui, A. T. Pereda, J. L. M.
de Falc on, I. Ederra, R.Gonzalo, and P. de Maagt, “Broadband radar cross-section reduction using AMC technology,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag, vol. 61, no.
12, pp. 6136 – 6143, 201337 Y. Zhang, R.
Mittra, and B. Z. Wang, “Novel design for low-RCS screens using a Combination of dual-AMC,” Proc.
of IEEE Int. Symp. Antennas Propag., Charleston, June 2009, pp. 1 – 4.38 Y.
Fu, Y. Li, and N. Yuan, “Wideband composite AMC surfaces for RCS reduction,” Microw. Opt.
Technol. Lett., vol. 53, pp.
712 – 715, 2011.39 A. Edalati, K. Sarabandi, “Wideband, wide angle, polarization independent RCS reduction using non absorptive miniaturized element frequency selective surfaces,” IEEE Trans, Antennas Propag., vol.
62, no. 2, pp. 747 – 754, 2014.40 D. M.
Pozar, “RCS reduction for a microstrip antenna using a normally biased ferrite substrate,” IEEE Microw. Guided Wave Lett., vol. 2, no. 5, pp.
196–198, May 199241 Zi-Jian Han, Wei Song, and Xin-Qing Sheng, Senior Member, IEEE, “Gain Enhancement and RCS Reduction for Patch Antenna by Using Polarization-Dependent EBG Surface” IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 16, 2017.42 Eugen F.
Knott “RCS reduction of dihedral corner” IEEE Transactions on Antenna and Propagation, May 1977.43 C.R Trueman, S.R mishra ” RCS of Small Aircraft at High Frequency” ANTEM 94.44 H. Moheb,L.
Shafai, S. Mishra “Application Of Integral Equations to RCS Computation of Complex Material target” ANTEM 92.45 Feng Lin ,L· Ruan Yingzheng “Application of FSS to Reduction of Antennas’ RCS ” Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, Vol.7, No.l, 1996, pp.
71-74 .46 Wenbo Pan, Cheng Huang, Po Chen, Xiaoliang Ma,Chenggang Hu, and Xiangang Luo, “A Low-RCS and High-Gain Partially Reflecting Surface Antenna” IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 62, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2014.47 Fan Yang and Yahya Rahmat-Samii, “Polarisation-dependent Eiectromagnetic Band Gap (PDEBG) Structures: Design and Applicatons” MICROWAVE AND OPTICAL TECHNOLOGY LETTERS / Vol. 41, No.
6, June 20 2004.48 Mao Long, Wen Jiang, “Wideband RCS Reduction Using Polarization Conversion Metasurface and Partially Reflecting Surface” IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 16, 201749 Simone Genovesi,Filippo Costa, “Wideband Radar Cross Section Reduction of Slot Antennas Arrays” IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ANTENNAS AND PROPAGATION, VOL. 62, NO. 1, JANUARY 2014.50 Yuejun Zheng, Jun Gao, Xiangyu Cao, “Wideband RCS Reduction of a Microstrip Antenna Using Artificial Magnetic Conductor Structures” IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 14, 2015.51 Jingjing Xue, Wen Jiang, Shuxi Gong, “Chessboard AMC Surface Based on Quasi- Fractal Structure for Wideband RCS Reduction” IEEE ANTENNAS AND WIRELESS PROPAGATION LETTERS, VOL. 17, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2018.