A Comparison of Beamforming and Direction Finding Algorithms (Beamscan and MUSIC) on a Linear Array HF Radar in a Medium to Low Wave Energy Environment
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

For very narrow results

When looking for a specific result

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Dates

to

Document Data
Library
People
Clear All
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

The NOAA IR serves as an archival repository of NOAA-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other information authored or co-authored by NOAA or funded partners. As a repository, the NOAA IR retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i

A Comparison of Beamforming and Direction Finding Algorithms (Beamscan and MUSIC) on a Linear Array HF Radar in a Medium to Low Wave Energy Environment

Filetype[PDF-5.56 MB]


Select the Download button to view the document
This document is over 5mb in size and cannot be previewed
Details You May Also Like

Details:

  • Journal Title:
    Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology
  • Personal Author:
  • NOAA Program & Office:
    NOS (National Ocean Service)
  • Description:
    We assess the performance of three different algorithms for estimating surface ocean currents from two linear array HF radar systems. The delay-and-sum beamforming algorithm, commonly used with beamforming systems, is compared with two direction-finding algorithms: Multiple Signal Classification (MUSIC) and direction finding using beamforming (Beamscan). A 7-month dataset from two HF radar sites (CSW and GTN) on Long Bay, South Carolina (United States), is used to compare the different methods. The comparison is carried out on three locations (midpoint along the baseline and two locations with in situ Eulerian current data available) representing different steering angles. Beamforming produces surface current data that show high correlation near the radar boresight (R2 ≥ 0.79). At partially sheltered locations far from the radar boresight directions (59° and 48° for radar sites CSW and GTN, respectively) there is no correlation for CSW (R2 = 0) and the correlation is reduced significantly for GTN (R2 = 0.29). Beamscan performs similarly near the radar boresight (R2 = 0.8 and 0.85 for CSW and GTN, respectively) but better than beamforming far from the radar boresight (R2 = 0.52 and 0.32 for CSW and GTN, respectively). MUSIC’s performance, after significant tuning, is similar near the boresight (R2 = 0.78 and 0.84 for CSW and GTN) while worse than Beamscan but better than beamforming far from the boresight (R2 = 0.42 and 0.27 for CSW and GTN, respectively). Comparisons at the midpoint (baseline comparison) show the largest performance difference between methods. Beamforming (R2 = 0.01) is the worst performer, followed by MUSIC (R2 = 0.37) while Beamscan (R2 = 0.76) performs best.
  • Keywords:
  • Source:
    Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 40(2), 191-218
  • DOI:
  • ISSN:
    0739-0572;1520-0426;
  • Format:
    PDF
  • Publisher:
    American Meteorological Society
  • Document Type:
    Journal Article
  • Funding:
    Grant no. NA16NOS0120028
  • Rights Information:
    Other
  • Compliance:
    Library
  • Main Document Checksum:
  • Download URL:
  • File Type:

Supporting Files

  • No Additional Files
More +

You May Also Like

Checkout today's featured content at repository.library.noaa.gov

Version 3.27.1