Publications

Yocky, David A.; Doren, Neall; Bacon, Terry A.; Wahl, Daniel E.; Eichel, Paul H.; Jakowatz, Charles V.; Delaplain, Gilbert G.; Dubbert, Dale F.; Tise, Bertice L.; White, Kyle R.

Typical synthetic aperture RADAR (SAR) imaging employs a co-located RADAR transmitter and receiver. Bistatic SAR imaging separates the transmitter and receiver locations. A bistatic SAR configuration allows for the transmitter and receiver(s) to be in a variety of geometric alignments. Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) / New Mexico proposed the deployment of a ground-based RADAR receiver. This RADAR receiver was coupled with the capability of digitizing and recording the signal collected. SNL proposed the possibility of creating an image of targets the illuminating SAR observes. This document describes the developed hardware, software, bistatic SAR configuration, and its deployment to test the concept of a ground-based bistatic SAR. In the proof-of-concept experiments herein, the RADAR transmitter will be a commercial SAR satellite and the RADAR receiver will be deployed at ground level, observing and capturing RADAR ground/targets illuminated by the satellite system.

Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering

Jakowatz, Charles V.; Doren, Neall

The convolution/back-projection (CBP) algorithm has recently once again been touted as the "gold standard" for spotlight-mode SAR image formation, as it is proclaimed to achieve better image quality than the well-known and often employed polar formatting algorithm (PFA) 1. In addition, it has been suggested that PFA is less flexible than CBP in that PFA can only compute the SAR image on one grid and PFA cannot add or subtract pulses from the imaging process. The argument for CBP acknowledges the computational burden of CBP compared to PFA, but asserts that the increased image accuracy and flexibility of the formation process is warranted, at least in some imaging scenarios. Because CBP can now be sped up by the proper algorithm design, it becomes, according to this line of analysis, the clear algorithm of choice for SAR image formation. In this paper we reject the above conclusion by showing that PFA and CBP achieve the same image quality, and that PFA has complete flexibility, including choice of imaging plane, size of illuminated beam area to be imaged, resolution of the image, and others. We demonstrate these claims via formation of both simulated and real SAR imagery using both algorithms.