2021
DOI: 10.1117/1.jatis.8.1.011005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement of the LOFAR-HBA beam patterns using an unmanned aerial vehicle in the near field

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
(30 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the next step, the IESS computes the far-field of the equivalent sources in Fig. 23 Ref max (8) is defined as the difference between the far-field magnitudes of the UAV-based result UAV ( , ) and the reference UAV ( , ). Both are normalized to the maximum magnitude UAV max and Ref max , respectively, of the considered far-field cut.…”
Section: B Measurement Results For 18 Ghzmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the next step, the IESS computes the far-field of the equivalent sources in Fig. 23 Ref max (8) is defined as the difference between the far-field magnitudes of the UAV-based result UAV ( , ) and the reference UAV ( , ). Both are normalized to the maximum magnitude UAV max and Ref max , respectively, of the considered far-field cut.…”
Section: B Measurement Results For 18 Ghzmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is of major interest when the environment of the antenna influences the radiated field as it might occur for broadcast [3], [4], aircraft navigation [5] or mobile communication [6] systems. On-site testing is also inevitable when the antenna is immobile or simply too large for any indoor measurement facility as is the case for the lowfrequency antenna array (LOFAR) radio telescope [7], [8] and the square kilometer array (SKA) [9]. Small hovering platforms are also suitable for field distribution measurements due to their minimal scattering behavior compared to conventional probe positioning systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the differential GNSS position accuracy of few centimeters translates to a negligible angular error of about 0.03 degrees. Magnitude and phase of the FF EEPs have been extracted from this measurement as in [47], [48]. In particular, the reference antenna has been used also in this FF case for the computation of each EEP measured phase.…”
Section: Embedded Element Patterns (Eeps)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The agreement between the 2D patterns is quite satisfactory, i.e., main lobe size and first sidelobe locations and levels are in agreement. The 2D FF measured pattern is not available due to its prohibitive time duration (only a few FF cuts can be scanned by the UAV in a single flight [47]). For example, a complete FF pattern measurement within the ± 29 • angular range with a resolution of 1 • will require a flight duration larger than 120 minutes.…”
Section: Array Patternmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is of major interest when the environment of the antenna influences the radiated field as it might occur for broadcast [3], [4], aircraft navigation [5] or mobile communication [6] systems. On-site testing is also inevitable when the antenna is immobile or simply too large for any indoor measurement facility as is the case for the low-frequency antenna array (LOFAR) radio telescope [7], [8] and the square kilometer array (SKA) [9]. Small hovering platforms are also suitable for field distribution measurements due to their minimal scattering behavior compared to conventional probe positioning systems.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%