Robust Voltage Fitting Techniques for Meteor Doppler Speed Determination

Briczinski, S. J.; Wen, C.-H.; Mathews, J. D.; Doherty, J.F.; Zhou, Qin

doi:10.1109/tgrs.2006.881122

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The local sunrise observations peak at approximately the same positions as the total populations but do not contain nearly as many slower events. While the variance of the peak flux has been observed at AO previously [ Janches and Chau , 2005] and has been explained as a geometrical effect, the locations of the peaks differ from previous results apparently because of the improved Doppler resolution methods employed in the MRSD [ Briczinski et al , 2006]. Another source of the discrepancies between the total (all day) distributions is due to the different observation windows used (4 days in 2001 versus 3 days in 2006 and 2007), which impacts the Doppler distributions especially as the 2001 observations included more detections away from near sunrise (apex transit) times.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…This is accomplished by fitting the complex voltage from the region of the meteor (45 μ s duration) to a complex exponential with the amplitude (and therefore energy), phase, and Doppler frequency as the fitted parameters. Fitting is accomplished using a combination of an improved gradient search algorithm where the error considered is the mean squared error and a linear inversion technique which is initial guess independent; both independent approaches must agree for the event to be accepted [ Briczinski et al , 2006]. The (often noisy) edges of the returned pulse are ignored in the fitting routine to ensure that only the returned pulse is measured.…”

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The received ''head echo'' pulse returns exhibited Doppler shifts due to the radial component of the 10 -80 km/s meteoroid speeds. Doppler speed estimates were obtained by directly fitting a complex exponential to the returned voltages, resulting in instantaneous (single-pulse) measurement errors on the order of one part in 500 [Briczinski et al, 2006].…”

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Statistical and fragmentation properties of the micrometeoroid flux observed at Arecibo

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The micrometeor observations performed using the 430 MHz Arecibo Observatory radar have proven to be crucial for the understanding of meteoric effects on the aeronomy of the upper atmosphere. Meteors observed during the February 2001, 2006, and 2007 campaigns have been analyzed with a fast Fourier transform periodic search algorithm that automatically and uniformly detects meteor events between altitudes of 80 and 142 km. We present a description of the new technique used to detect meteors as well as the meteoroid parameters: altitude profiles, radial speeds, and decelerations. We also note the expected correlation between the radar transmitted power and the observed meteor event rate. The large number of events has enabled us to statistically estimate the average mass density of the observed population indicating that our detected events are generally cometary (1 g/cm3) and not asteroidal (3 g/cm3) in origin. Additionally, many meteor events are observed in which the radar meteor disappears from one radar pulse to the next (i.e., in 1 ms). We interpret this as indicative of the catastrophic destruction of the meteoroid. Until destruction, these events appear to undergo only minor ablation of their volatile components over the observed trajectory. As with a major fraction of all events recorded, the meteoroids that disappear in a terminal event show linear decelerations before their abrupt disappearance. This apparently low ablative mass deposition process may play an important role in the composition (aeronomy) of the upper atmosphere, as it likely produces submicron‐sized particles rather than the atom level products of ablation. First results on the altitude, speed, and mass distributions of terminal event meteoroids are given yielding some clues on the physics of the terminal event. Finally, the statistics of those events that yield no deceleration are compared statistically with those that exhibit deceleration with the conclusion that both groups are statistically the same. We further conclude that along with low signal‐to‐noise ratio and short echo duration, fragmentation of this group of particles is a primary cause of the inability to determine deceleration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Statistical and fragmentation properties of the micrometeoroid flux observed at Arecibo

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Doppler technique for obtaining the instantaneous meteor Doppler velocity and deceleration is described in Janches et al (2000aJanches et al ( ,b, 2001. Subsequent improvement of the signal processing techniques at AO has been particularized by Mathews et al (2003); Wen et al (2004Wen et al ( , 2005a; Briczinski et al (2006); Wen et al (2005bWen et al ( , 2007. The emphases of the analysis technique development have been to implement automated real-time analysis of meteor parameters (Wen et al, 2004), remove non-periodic bursty interference (Wen et al, 2005b), and separate incoherent scatter from meteor signals (Wen et al, 2005a(Wen et al, , 2007.…”

Section: Eiscatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…based on the difference in the measured ranges due to range-Doppler coupling (Loveland et al, 2011). Mathews et al (2008) applied the analysis methods developed for the 430 MHz AO radar and described by Mathews et al (2003) and Briczinski et al (2006), to the 449.3 MHz 32 panel Advanced Modular Incoherent Scatter Radar at Poker Flat Alaska (PFISR-32), to the 1290 MHz Sondrestrom Radar Facility (SRF), and later also to the Resolute Bay Incoherent Scatted Radar (RISR) (Malhotra and Mathews, 2011). Mathews et al (2008) estimated that AO is 77 times more sensitive than SRF and 2100 times more sensitive than PFISR.…”

Section: Eiscatmentioning

confidence: 99%

A meteor head echo analysis algorithm for the lower VHF band

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We have developed an automated analysis scheme for meteor head echo observations by the 46.5 MHz Middle and Upper atmosphere (MU) radar near Shigaraki, Japan (34.85 • N, 136.10 • E). The analysis procedure computes meteoroid range, velocity and deceleration as functions of time with unprecedented accuracy and precision. This is crucial for estimations of meteoroid mass and orbital parameters as well as investigations of the meteoroid-atmosphere interaction processes. In this paper we present this analysis procedure in detail. The algorithms use a combination of singlepulse-Doppler, time-of-flight and pulse-to-pulse phase correlation measurements to determine the radial velocity to within a few tens of metres per second with 3.12 ms time resolution. Equivalently, the precision improvement is at least a factor of 20 compared to previous single-pulse measurements. Such a precision reveals that the deceleration increases significantly during the intense part of a meteoroid's ablation process in the atmosphere. From each received pulse, the target range is determined to within a few tens of meters, or the order of a few hundredths of the 900 m long range gates. This is achieved by transmitting a 13-bit Barker code oversampled by a factor of two at reception and using a novel range interpolation technique. The meteoroid velocity vector is determined from the estimated radial velocity by carefully taking the location of the meteor target and the angle from its trajectory to the radar beam into account. The latter is determined from target range and bore axis offset. We have identified and solved the signal processing issue giving rise to the peculiar signature in signal to noise ratio plots reported by Galindo et al. (2011), and show how to use the range interpolation technique to differentiate the effect of signal processing from physical processes.

show abstract