A Study of the Effects of Amplitude and Phase Errors on the Angle-Measurement Accuracy of Phased Array Radar under Interference Cancellation Conditions

ZHAN Siheng; ZHOU Liang; SHEN Ruobin; ZHANG Jiahao; WANG Bin; MENG Jin

doi:10.11999/JEIT251195

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of Electronics & Information Technology > 2026 >

ZHAN Siheng, ZHOU Liang, SHEN Ruobin, ZHANG Jiahao, WANG Bin, MENG Jin. A Study of the Effects of Amplitude and Phase Errors on the Angle-Measurement Accuracy of Phased Array Radar under Interference Cancellation Conditions[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology. doi: 10.11999/JEIT251195

Citation:

ZHAN Siheng, ZHOU Liang, SHEN Ruobin, ZHANG Jiahao, WANG Bin, MENG Jin. A Study of the Effects of Amplitude and Phase Errors on the Angle-Measurement Accuracy of Phased Array Radar under Interference Cancellation Conditions[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology. doi: 10.11999/JEIT251195

Citation:

ZHAN Siheng, ZHOU Liang, SHEN Ruobin, ZHANG Jiahao, WANG Bin, MENG Jin. A Study of the Effects of Amplitude and Phase Errors on the Angle-Measurement Accuracy of Phased Array Radar under Interference Cancellation Conditions[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology. doi: 10.11999/JEIT251195

PDF( 4688 KB)

A Study of the Effects of Amplitude and Phase Errors on the Angle-Measurement Accuracy of Phased Array Radar under Interference Cancellation Conditions

doi: 10.11999/JEIT251195 cstr: 32379.14.JEIT251195

ZHAN Siheng^{1, 2},
ZHOU Liang^{2
,
,},
SHEN Ruobin²,
ZHANG Jiahao²,
WANG Bin¹,
MENG Jin^{2, 3}

1.
School of Electronic Science and Engineering, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu 611731, China
2.
National Key Laboratory of Electromagnetic Energy Technology, Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan 430033, China
3.
Qianyuan National Laboratory, Hangzhou 310024, China

Funds: Qianyuan Laboratory Project (S-KYZZ-F-02-202506-0060)

Accepted Date: 2026-03-24
Rev Recd Date: 2026-03-24

Available Online: 2026-05-03

Abstract

Abstract

Objective The electromagnetic environment is becoming increasingly complex, and mainlobe interference constrains the detection performance of phased array radars. Adaptive interference cancellation (AIC) can effectively suppress such interference but leads to mainlobe pattern distortion and introduces azimuth angle measurement errors. Most existing studies focus on interference cancellation mechanisms, with little attention paid to the angle measurement errors introduced by this technique. Amplitude-phase channel errors in the radar receive channel also degrade angle measurement accuracy. This paper investigates the influence of amplitude-phase channel errors in the receive channel on the angle measurement errors of monopulse phased array radars equipped with no difference-difference channel. Methods A monopulse phased array radar with no difference-difference channel is studied, and the amplitude-phase errors in the receiving channels are modeled as a normal distribution. The mean shows the systematic offset and the standard deviation shows random fluctuations. The operation principles of phased array radar receivers, monopulse radar systems, angle measurement theory, and mainlobe interference suppression and cancellation theory are introduced. Two angle measurement models are established through theoretical derivation: an ideal reference model and an amplitude-phase error model. Simulation results show that the radar’s effective angle measurement range is ±2.5° under ideal interference-free and error-free conditions. The jamming source is set at –1.2°, and the angle measurement results are taken as a reference for subsequent experiments. Monte Carlo simulations (100 independent tests for each parameter set) are used to analyze the statistical characteristics of angle measurement errors. Heatmaps are used to clearly show the absolute errors and obtain their variation laws. Results and Discussions (1) When there is no channel amplitude-phase error, the jamming angle is fixed at –1.2°; prior to interference cancellation, the target bearing matches the true value. After cancellation, the absolute error between the target signal and the true value near the beam normal is less than or equal to 0.1°, but null dips near the jamming angle cause abrupt changes in azimuth angle, and the error increases as the deviation from the beam normal increases. (2) Before cancellation, the azimuth angle measurement error increases with the absolute value of the amplitude mean and the incident angle, reaching a peak of approximately >0.06° at an amplitude mean of ±0.9 dB and an incident angle of ±2.5°. Within an incident angle range of ±2°, the error is typically <0.02°; when the amplitude mean is fixed, the error increases with the amplitude standard deviation; when the phase standard deviation is fixed, the error increases with the absolute value of the phase mean; it exceeds 0.15° at a phase mean of ±0.9°, and reaches approximately 0.6° at a phase standard deviation of 6° and an incident angle of ±2.5°. (3) After cancellation, phase error is most sensitive at an incident angle of 0.5°, where the azimuth angle measurement error reaches 0.4°. Outside this region, the error can be controlled within 0.2° and decreases rapidly as the deviation from the beam normal increases. Conclusions This paper quantifies the impact of amplitude-phase errors in the receiving channel on azimuth angle measurement errors before and after interference cancellation. The main conclusions are as follows: (1) Both amplitude and phase errors cause random fluctuations in azimuth angle measurements, with phase errors having a more significant impact; (2) In the absence of jamming, azimuth angle measurement errors are smallest near the beam axis and increase as the measurement approaches the boundaries of the effective angle measurement range; (3) In the presence of jamming and during cancellation, the azimuth angle measurement error peaks near the beam normal and decays rapidly. This study provides engineering guidance for azimuth angle measurement error assessment, error budgeting, and mainlobe interference suppression. Future research will focus on non-normal amplitude-phase errors, calibration dynamics, scenarios with multiple jamming sources, and experimental validation.
- Phased Array Radar,
- Sum-Difference Angle Measurement,
- Mainlobe Suppression Jamming,
- Adaptive Interference Cancellation,
- Amplitude-Phase Error

FullText(HTML)

References(24)

References

[1]	ZHANG Chudi, WANG Lei, JIANG Rundong, et al. Radar jamming decision-making in cognitive electronic warfare: A review[J]. IEEE Sensors Journal, 2023, 23(11): 11383–11403. doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2023.3267068.
[2]	HUANG Penghui, YANG Hao, ZOU Zihao, et al. Multichannel clutter modeling, analysis, and suppression for missile-borne radar systems[J]. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2022, 58(4): 3236–3260. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2022.3147136.
[3]	LIU Quanhua, WANG Changjie, TIAN Dezhi, et al. A mainlobe jamming suppression method for an FDA–MIMO radar system with an ultralarge sparse aperture[J]. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2025, 61(5): 11350–11363. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2025.3566087.
[4]	信业镝, 何方敏, 葛松虎, 等. 基于空间参考信号的数字干扰对消系统性能分析[J]. 电子与信息学报, 2025, 47(12): 5126–5136. doi: 10.11999/JEIT250679. XIN Yedi, HE Fangmin, GE Songhu, et al. Performance analysis of spatial-reference-signal-based digital interference cancellation systems[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology, 2025, 47(12): 5126–5136. doi: 10.11999/JEIT250679.
[5]	SHAO Shuai, WANG Wenqin, SUN Yan, et al. Effects of spatial position on mainlobe interference suppression performance of FDA-MIMO radar[J]. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2024, 60(6): 9437–9443. doi: 10.1109/TAES.2024.3443778.
[6]	GUO Xiaolu, SU Jia, and ZHU Nan. Interference suppression algorithm based on short time fractional Fourier transform[J]. Sensors, 2024, 24(6): 1785. doi: 10.3390/s24061785.
[7]	KIM Y, WONG K K, ZHANG Jianzhong, et al. Low complexity frequency domain nonlinear self-interference cancellation for flexible duplex[J]. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 2025, 24(8): 6627–6642. doi: 10.1109/TWC.2025.3554988.
[8]	LIU Jiancheng, ZHANG Jingtao, LI Tian, et al. Unintended interference suppression based on decision feedback adaptive cancellation for DSSS satellite communication[J]. Chinese Journal of Electronics, 2025, 34(2): 673–682. doi: 10.23919/cje.2023.00.398.
[9]	LU Qiaran, QIN Huanding, HE Fangmin, et al. Wideband interference cancellation system based on a fast and robust LMS algorithm[J]. Sensors, 2023, 23(18): 7871. doi: 10.3390/s23187871.
[10]	WHIPPLE A, RUZINDANA M W, BURNETT M C, et al. Wideband array signal processing with real-time adaptive interference mitigation[J]. Sensors, 2023, 23(14): 6584. doi: 10.3390/s23146584.
[11]	LI Shuai, CHEN Xiaoyang, HOU Xiaogeng, et al. Wideband adaptive beamforming for mainlobe interferences based on angle-frequency reciprocity and covariance matrix reconstruction[C]. 2021 CIE International Conference on Radar, Haikou, China, 2021: 1561–1565. doi: 10.1109/Radar53847.2021.10028512.
[12]	HAN Bowen, YANG Xiaopeng, LV Qiang, et al. Mainlobe and sidelobe jamming suppression method based on distributed array radar with eigen-projection matrix processing and null constraints[J]. IET Radar, Sonar & Navigation, 2024, 18(11): 2212–2221. doi: 10.1049/rsn2.12533.
[13]	GARIKAPATI S, NAGULU A, KADOTA I, et al. Full-duplex receiver with wideband, high-power RF self-interference cancellation based on capacitor stacking in switched-capacitor delay lines[J]. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 2024, 59(7): 2105–2120. doi: 10.1109/JSSC.2024.3351615.
[14]	LI Ruike, HE Huafeng, LIU Xiang, et al. An anti-mainlobe suppression jamming method based on improved blind source separation using variational mode decomposition and wavelet packet decomposition[J]. Sensors, 2025, 25(11): 3404. doi: 10.3390/s25113404.
[15]	WANG Wenqin. Frequency diverse array auto-scanning beam characteristics and potential radar applications[J]. IEEE Access, 2022, 10: 85278–85288. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3197191.
[16]	MA Xiaofeng, JIANG Siqin, ZHANG Shurui, et al. Joint wideband beamforming algorithm for main lobe jamming suppression in distributed array radar[J]. Remote Sensing, 2024, 16(13): 2402. doi: 10.3390/rs16132402.
[17]	LI Hongtao, RAN Longyao, CHEN Shengyao, et al. Antenna selection and receive beamforming for multi-functional sparse linear array via consensus ADMM[J]. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2024, 73(7): 10435–10450. doi: 10.1109/TVT.2024.3383210.
[18]	WANG Xiangtuan, RUAN Hang, LIU Yimin, et al. A Random Antenna subset selection jamming method against multistatic radar system[J]. Signal Processing, 2021, 186: 108126. doi: 10.1016/j.sigpro.2021.108126.
[19]	吴振华, 崔金鑫, 曹宜策, 等. 零记忆增量学习的复合有源干扰识别[J]. 电子与信息学报, 2025, 47(1): 188–200. doi: 10.11999/JEIT240521. WU Zhenhua, CUI Jinxin, CAO Yice, et al. Compound active jamming recognition for zero-memory incremental learning[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology, 2025, 47(1): 188–200. doi: 10.11999/JEIT240521.
[20]	林志平, 肖亮, 陈宏毅, 等. 面向大语言模型的抗干扰协同推断技术[J]. 电子与信息学报, 2025, 47(11): 4572–4582. doi: 10.11999/JEIT250675. LIN Zhiping, XIAO Liang, CHEN Hongyi, et al. Collaborative inference for large language models against jamming attacks[J]. Journal of Electronics & Information Technology, 2025, 47(11): 4572–4582. doi: 10.11999/JEIT250675.
[21]	PENG Wenshen, HE Chuan, CAO Fei, et al. Enhanced radar anti-jamming with multi-agent reinforcement learning[J]. IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 2024, 31: 3114–3118. doi: 10.1109/LSP.2024.3493797.
[22]	YANG Haonan, LIU Yongcai, ZHOU Liang, et al. The effect of excitation errors on the performance of AESA-based cross-eye jammers[J]. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 2024, 23(3): 955–959. doi: 10.1109/LAWP.2023.3340194.
[23]	SUN Ran, SAKAI J, SUZUKI K, et al. Antenna element space interference cancelling radar for angle estimations of multiple targets[J]. IEEE Access, 2021, 9: 72547–72555. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3078895.
[24]	YANG Haonan, LIU Yongcai, ZHOU Liang, et al. The effect of excitation errors on the performance of AESA-based cross-eye jammers[J]. IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, 2024, 23(3): 955–959. doi: 10.1109/LAWP.2023.3340194. (查阅网上资料,本条文献与第22条文献重复,请确认).