2026-09-22T22:35:38Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/request

oai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/81212022-01-13T07:54:29Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023

Robert G. Atkins, Jin Au Kong and Y.E. Yang. Pacheco, Joe, 1978- Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 2005-08-24T20:30:31Z 2005-08-24T20:30:31Z 2000 2000 http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/8121 51586036 Thesis (M.Eng.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, 2000. Includes bibliographical references (p. 267-272). Although a number of radar cross section prediction techniques have been developed which exploit body of revolution symmetry, the use of finite-difference techniques with these geometries has not been throughly explored. This thesis investigates several finite-difference approaches which vary both in the approximations they introduce as well as the computational resources they require. These techniques include body of revolution finite-difference time-domain methods with both staircase and conformal grids, a hybrid FD-TD/geometrical optics method, and a body of revolution parabolic wave equation method. In addition, the use of the monostatic-bistatic equivalence principle is explored in approximating monostatic RCS at multiple angles from a single FD-TD simulation. Both canonical and more realistic BOR targets are modeled. The results from these techniques are compared, with each other and with method of moment predictions, physical theory of diffraction predictions, and analytic results. From these comparisons the tradeoffs possible between accuracy and computation with this collection of finite-difference tools is determined. by Joe Pacheco, Jr. M.Eng. 272 p. 19346236 bytes 19345991 bytes application/pdf application/pdf eng Massachusetts Institute of Technology M.I.T. theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. See provided URL for inquiries about permission. http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582 Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. Finite difference techniques for body of revolution radar cross section Thesis application/pdf false Publication unknown unknown <Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="7fe89570-0ac7-4d06-985a-8cde7a89d945"> <Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type> <Language>eng</Language> <Title>Finite difference techniques for body of revolution radar cross section</Title> <PublishedIn> <Publication> </Publication> </PublishedIn> <PublicationDate>2000</PublicationDate> <Authors> <Author> <DisplayName>Pacheco, Joe, 1978-</DisplayName> <Affiliation> <OrgUnit> </OrgUnit> </Affiliation> </Author> </Authors> <Editors> </Editors> <Publishers> <Publisher> <DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName> <OrgUnit /> </Publisher> </Publishers> <License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License> <Keyword>Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.</Keyword> <Abstract>Although a number of radar cross section prediction techniques have been developed which exploit body of revolution symmetry, the use of finite-difference techniques with these geometries has not been throughly explored. This thesis investigates several finite-difference approaches which vary both in the approximations they introduce as well as the computational resources they require. These techniques include body of revolution finite-difference time-domain methods with both staircase and conformal grids, a hybrid FD-TD/geometrical optics method, and a body of revolution parabolic wave equation method. In addition, the use of the monostatic-bistatic equivalence principle is explored in approximating monostatic RCS at multiple angles from a single FD-TD simulation. Both canonical and more realistic BOR targets are modeled. The results from these techniques are compared, with each other and with method of moment predictions, physical theory of diffraction predictions, and analytic results. From these comparisons the tradeoffs possible between accuracy and computation with this collection of finite-difference tools is determined.</Abstract> <Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right" > </Access> </Publication>