Generalization of the Synthetic Aperture Radar Azimuth Multi-Aperture Processing Scheme—MAPS

This paper analyzes the advantages and the drawbacks of using the Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) azimuth multichannel technique known as Multi-Aperture Processing Scheme (MAPS), in a set of relevant application cases that are far from the canonical ones. In the scientific literature on this topic, equally distributed azimuth channels with the quasi-monostatic deployment are assumed. With this research, we aim at extending the models from the current literature to (i) a generic bistatic acquisition geometry, (ii) a set of cases where the number of receiving tiles is not the same for each channel, or (iii) the tiles are shared between adjacent channels thus creating an overlapping configuration. The paper introduces the mathematical models for the listed non-conventional MAPS cases. Dealing with the bistatic MAPS, we first solve the problem by interpreting multichannel acquisition as a bank of Linear Time Invariant (LTI) filters. Then, a more physical approach, based on discrimination of the direction of arrivals (DoAs) is pursued. The effectiveness of the two methods and the advantages of the second approach on the first are proved by using a simplified 1D end-to-end simulation. Even limiting to the monostatic configuration, the azimuth antenna tiles have always been supposed equally partitioned among the RX channels. Overcoming this limit has two advantages: (i) more MAPS possible solutions in case few azimuth tiles are available, as in the ROSE-L mission: (ii) the number of channels can be designed independently of the number of tiles, also allowing asymmetric solutions, useful for a phase array antenna with an odd number of tiles such as in the SAOCOM-1 mission. Conversely, sharing one or more receiving tiles in different receiving channels makes the input noise partially correlated. The drawback is an increase in the noise level. A trade-off is determined for the different solutions obtained using simulations with real mission parameters. The theoretical performance and the end-to-end simulations are compared.