Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Fundamental Limitations On Repeater Jamrmng Frequency-Hopping Communications

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 7

IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS I N COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 7, NO. 4.

MAY 1989 569

Fundamental Limitations on Repeater Jamrmng of


.
Frequency-Hopping Communications
DON J. TORRIERI

Abstract-The benefits of frequency hopping are potentially neu-


tralized by a repeater jammer. In this paper, fundamental limitations
on the effectiveness of repeater jamming are derived. These limitations
arise because of the geometry and the need for frequency estimation
and signal sorting. Limitations on the hopping rate, which might be
increased to counter a repeater-jamming threat, are derived from con-
sideration of practical requirements. \ /
\ /
\ /
,
I. INTRODUCTION
\
\
.-
_-___”
Fig. I . Geometrical configuration of communicators and jammer.

F REQUENCY hopping allows communicators to hop


out of frequency channels with interference. The ben-
efits of frequency hopping are potentially neutralized by arrival-time delay of the jamming relative to the desired
a repeater jammer (also known as a follower jammer), signal at the receiver must not exceed a certain fraction
which is a device that intercepts a signal, processes it, and of the dwell time if the jamming is to be effective. The
then transmits jamming at the same center frequency. To value of 7 is determined by the jamming power at the
be effective against a frequency-hopping system, the jam- receiver, the number of symbols per frequency-hopping
ming energy must reach the victim receiver before it hops pulse, and the details of the receiver design.
to a new set of frequency channels. Thus, the greater the A rearrangement of (1) yields
hopping rate, the more protected the frequency-hopping dz + d3 5 (7T,I - T’,)c + d l . (2)
system is against a repeater jammer.
The jammer waveform generated by a properly de- If the right-hand side of this inequality is regarded as a
signed repeater is neither a tone nor a replica of the inter- constant, then equating the two sides defines an ellipse
cepted signal. These waveforms are too similar to the de- with the transmitter and the receiver at the two foci. If the
sired signal at the victim receiver to allow efficient repeater jammer is outside this ellipse, the jamming can-
jamming when the jamming power level is high because not be effective. Fig. 1 shows a jammer located on the
the receiver may sometimes make correct decisions by re- boundary of the ellipse.
sponding to the predominant jamming signal as if it were In addition to the geometric restrictions, there are other
the desired signal [ I ] . The jamming waveform is usually problems entailed in using a repeater jammer. A large
a noise-modulated signal [2] that can perhaps be modeled portion of the frequency-hopping band must usually be
as a stationary Gaussian process with a narrowband power monitored by an interception receiver associated with the
spectrum. repeater. If many signals are simultaneously intercepted
Fig. 1 depicts the geometrical configuration of com- in different frequency channels, the repeater must either
municators and a jammer. For the repeater jamming to be divide its transmitted power among many jamming sig-
effective, we must have nals or attempt to isolate a small number of the inter-
cepted signals to be targeted. In the presence of many
communicators, the interception receiver may be faced
with a formidable signal-sorting problem. A specific
countermeasure to repeater jamming is the use of fre-
where c is the speed of an electromagnetic wave, T,,, is
quency-shift keying with independent frequency synthe-
the processing time required by the repeater, 7 is a frac-
sizers for each symbol in the symbol alphabet [ 11.
tion, and T,, is the dwell time of a pulse, which is the
A signal, pulse, or symbol is said to be “jammed” if
duration of a frequency-hopping pulse and is less than or
its reception is potentially degraded by a jamming signal
equal to the hop duration. This inequality states that the
with a significant amount of energy within the passband
of the receiver.
Manuscript received August I . 1988: revised January IS, 1989.
The author is with the U . S . Army Survivability Management Otfice, 11. SYMBOL EnnoR PROBABILITY
Department ofthe Army. Headquarters. U.S. Army Laboratory Command.
Adclphl. MD 20783-1 145. Because of the repeater’s processing time and the ge-
IEEE Log Number 8927183. ometry, the jamming signal is not present in the victim

0733-8716/89/0500-0569$01.OO O 1989 IEEE


570 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. 7. NO. 4, MAY 1989

receiver during a certain portion of each frequency-hop- This inequality provides a fundamental upper bound on
ping pulse. From the definitions given previously, it fol- the processing time for a repeater that is to respond rap-
lows that the duration of this portion is idly enough to disable a victim receiver. The first two
terms of the upper bound are equal to qTd.
As an example, suppose that the targeted frequency-
hopping system uses continuous-phase frequency-shift
keying (CPFSK) as the data modulation, and the devia-
Consider the repeater jamming of a digital communi-
tion ratio is 0.7. It is assumed for simplicity that the fre-
cation system for which a suitable performance measure
quency estimation is perfect so that 6 = F, ( p , , ) , and that
is the average probability of an error in a channel symbol
the thermal noise in the victim receiver is negligible so
P,. Let ‘Pjdenote the probability that a symbol is jammed
that Fnj = 0. The jamming waveform is modeled as band-
given that the processing time and geometry are favorable
limited white Gaussian noise. Assuming that pt, = - 3 dB
for jamming the symbol. Among the reasons why Pi may
be less than unity are: a) the interception receiver fails to
FJ
and using the results given in [l], we obtain F, = ( p I , )
monitor some of the frequency channels used by the com-
z 0.23. It is assumed that Pso = 0.1, Pi = 1, d2 d3 - +
dl = 30 km, and Td = 1.6 ms. Using ( 6 ) , we then find
municators, b) the repeater jammer lacks the power to jam
that Tprmust not exceed 0.904 ms. If the jamming power
all intercepted frequency-hopping communications, and
so ignores some intercepted pulses, and c) the intercep-
is increased so that p,, = - 6 dB, then F, =
0.29, and we
then find that TPrmust not exceed 1.048 ms.
tion receiver fails to detect some of the pulses. If there
are many symbols per pulse, then the fraction of the sym- 111. FREQUENCY ESTIMATION
bols that are geometrically susceptible to jamming is well Let B denote the bandwidth of a frequency channel, and
approximated by ( Td - Tnj) / T d . Among the susceptible let ufdenote the standard deviation of an estimate of the
symbols, the symbol error probability is PjF, (1 - + carrier frequency of an intercepted frequency-hopping
P i ) Fnj, where F, is the conditional symbol error proba- pulse. From Chebyshev’s inequality, it follows that the
bility given that a symbol is jammed, and Fnj is the con- probability that a random variable is within three standard
ditional symbol error probability given that a symbol is deviations of its mean value is at least 8/9. Thus, if the
not jammed. Among the symbols that are not geometri- frequency estimate is unbiased and 3uf IB / 2 , the prob-
cally susceptible to jamming, which constitute the frac- ability is at least 8 / 9 that the frequency estimate and,
tion TnJ/Tdof the symbols, the symbol error probability hence, the carrier frequency of the transmitted jamming
is Fnj. Thus, after regrouping terms, we find that the aver- waveform will be within the same frequency channel as
age symbol error probability is the intercepted signal. If the repeater responds quickly
Td - Tnj Td - Tnj
enough, then with high probability most of the jamming
P, = ~

Td
PjF,+
( 1--
Td
power will be in the instantaneous passband of the re-
ceiver. The foregoing reasoning implies that a frequency
Let p,, denote the signal-to-jamming ratio in the pass- estimator with
band of the victim receiver. If p l , were deterministic, then B
Uf I- (7)
FJ would be a function of p,,; that is, F, = ( p , . ) . How- FJ 6
ever, the interception receiver must estimate the carrier is a reasonable requirement for an interception receiver to
frequency of each pulse and then transmit a jamming support a repeater jammer.
waveform with the same carrier frequency. If the estimate We model an intercepted frequency-hopping pulse as a
is inaccurate, less jamming power will be transmitted in tone with an unknown initial phase. The Cramer-Rao in-
the receiver passband. Thus, p I , is a random variable, and equality for an unbiased frequency estimate in the pres-
ence of white Gaussian noise is [l]
4 = io
( P I )mdx

F,(ptJ)f(p,,)dpI,7 (5)
UfL
2a2T2E
(T)
’ (8)
where f ( p I , ) is the probability density of p,, and ( p,,)max
is the maximum value of p , , , which is realized when the where T is the duration of the observation interval, E is
frequency estimation is perfect and any other sources of the energy in the intercepted pulse during the observation
random variation are negligible. interval, and N 0 / 2 is the two-sided noise power spectral
Suppose that it is necessary that P, 2 P , , for a com- density. Although it is difficult to accurately determine ut’
munication system to be disabled. We assume that F, 1 for a particular frequency-estimation system, this bound
PTO> FnJsince P, > F, cannot be achieved by a repeater provides at least a rough measure of what might be
and P , = FnJin the absence of repeater jamming. There- achieved in a well-designed system.
fore, P, 2 PTO requires that TnJ< Td. Equations (3) and Let pi denote the signal-to-noise ratio in one frequency
(4) then imply that the processing time must satisfy channel at the input to the frequency-estimation system of
the interception receiver. Thus, E / N , = piBT. Combin-
ing this relation with (7) and (8), we obtain
T L 1J6B-I ( pi ) - ‘ I 3 , (9)
TORRIERI FUNDAMENTAL LIMITATIONS O N REPEATER JAMMING 57 I

which gives the lower bound on T that must be satisfied


to achieve a satisfactory frequency estimate with high
probability. Since TPr > T , this lower bound also bounds
Tpr.
As an example, suppose that B = 25 kHz and p, = 10
dB. Inequality (9) then implies that T,, > T 1 33 ps is
required. Thus, in this example, more than 33 ps of a
frequency-hopping pulse must be processed to make an
adequate estimate of its carrier frequency. Since T cannot INTERCEPTION
RECEIVER
exceed T,, an adequate estimate cannot be made if T,, I
Fig. 2 . Angular sectors relative to the interception receiver.
33 ps.

IV. DIRECTION-OF-ARRIVAL SORTING formly distributed over a sector of Q rad, as illustrated in


Fig. 2 , then the number of pulses jammed over an average
If a large number of frequency-hopping signals are
hop duration will be approximately ( 2 + ~ 6a,) N / Q or
simultaneously intercepted, the repeater may not be ca-
N , whichever is smaller. If the repeater can generate at
pable of jamming every intercepted pulse, because of lim-
most J jamming signals over an average hop duration, then
itations on either total power or processing. Therefore,
the repeater may jam only a fraction of the pulses of each
frequency-hopping signal. As the fraction falls, P, falls. J Imin [(” N ] (11)
If
is necessary for the repeater to respond with high proba-
bility to all the pulses emanating from the targeted sector.
To determine a’, the type of bearing estimator must be
specified. Here, we consider the phase interferometer be-
then inequality (6) cannot be satisfied. This failure indi- cause it is the bearing estimator most commonly used
cates that the repeater cannot impose P, 1 Pso, even if against narrowband pulses. From the Cramer-Rao in-
the processing time is arbitrarily small. equality, it is found that a phase interferometer that makes
The obvious solution to the problem is signal sorting. an unbiased bearing estimate in the presence of white
If the frequency-hopping pulses have identical wave- Gaussian noise produces a standard deviation satisfying
forms, then the sorting might plausibly be based on mea-
surements of the amplitudes, directions of arrival, or times
of arrival of the pulses. However, the terrain and multi-
path dependence of the propagation losses [ I ] usually
make amplitude discrimination impractical. where fo is the carrier frequency of the intercepted pulse,
In direction-of-arrival sorting, the bearing between the 4 is its bearing, 141 < ~ / 2 and, d is the distance be-
interception receiver and the source or transmitter of a tween the two most widely separated antennas of the phase
pulse is estimated for each intercepted pulse. The bearing interferometer. Letj,, denote the smallest frequency in the
to the victim receiver cannot be determined because it is sets of frequencies used by the frequency-hopping sig-
not transmitting, so in general the jamming energy will nals. Sincef, 1 A?,,cos 4 I I , and E / N O = p j B T , ( 1 2 )
have to be spread over a wide angular sector to make it yields
likely that the victim receiver will be jammed.
Suppose that a repeater attempts to disrupt communi-
cation systems that receive frequency-hopping pulses em-
anating from directions within E rad of a direction denoted If Tprsatisfies ( 6 ) , then ( 6 ) , (13), and T ITPrimply that
by 4o rad, as illustrated in Fig. 2 . The targeted sector
extends over 2 6 rad and may contain more than one fre-
quency-hopping transmitter. Let U, denote the standard
deviation of a bearing estimate. Suppose that the repeater
transmits a jamming signal whenever a pulse is measured
as arriving from the sector between 4o - t - 3a, and c$o
+ t + 3a, rad, which encompasses the targeted sector. If ( 1 1) is to be satisfied and 26 + 60, < Q , then (1 1) and
From Chebyshev’s inequality, it follows that the proba-
bility that a single pulse from the targeted sector will be (14) yield
jammed is at least 8/9. However, some pulses from ex-
traneous sources outside the targeted sector will also be
-+
J 1 2cN (-)
3Nc ( p,B)-’/2
Q QTJd
jammed. Suppose that there are N sources simultaneously
transmitting frequency-hopping signals over the same to-
tal hopping band. If these N sources generate sufiicient
power to be intercepted and they are approximately uni-
572 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS, VOL. I. NO. 4. MAY 1989

If J > 2 e N / Q , (15) can be inverted to determine the min-


imum value of pi necessary for repeater jamming to be
adequate when direction-of-arrival sorting is used. The
result is

* [Td -
Td(psO - F ~ J-) d2
' J ( 4- ' n , )
+ d3 - dl
C
1'.
( 16) I '.. ---_--_---
-- --__
This inequality explicitly indicates the importance of the .,' J I N = 0.07 ---___
-----__-----__
normalized target sector, 2 e / Q , which might be deter- 5 1 '\..,

mined by how accurately the bearings to the transmitters


associated with the victim receivers are known. Direc-
tion-of-arrival sorting is inadequate unIess ~ E / < Q J/N.
As an example, consider an extension of the example Fig. 3 . Required signal-to-noise ratio for direction-of-arrival sorting as
given in Section 11. It is assumed that Pso = 0.1, F, = function of pulse dwell time. Parameter values are P,,,= 0. I , F, = 0.29,
0.29, FnJ = 0 , d2 + d3 - d , = 30 km, B = 25 kHz-, PJ +
F,,, = 0, d2 d7 - d , = 30 km, B = 25 kHz, P, = 0.89, d = 1.5 m.
J,,= 30 MHz, and e / Q = 0.02. J / N is ratio of number of jamming
= 0.89, d = 1.5 m, f m = 30 MHz, and e / Q = 0.02. Fig. signals to number of frequency-hopping signals.
3 shows the lower bound on pI as a function of Td for
several values of J / N . The results in this figure illustrate
the mutual advantage of many frequency hoppers trans- that none of the other N - 1 extraneous hoppers transmits
mitting simultaneously. a pulse that arrives within this window. Let U, denote the
One might consider dividing the total hopping band into standard deviation of the arrival-time estimate of the cor-
several regions, each of which is used by a subset of the rect pulse. We assume that the window is 6u, in duration
hoppers. This procedure would simplify frequency man- and is centered about the expected arrival time so that the
agement and reduce the mutual interference among trans- probability is high that the correct pulse is sorted. If the
mitters and receivers in close proximity to each other. pulses due to the other N - 1 hoppers are assumed to
However, the decrease in the number of hoppers in each arrive independently at random times within Td seconds
spectral region would greatly facilitate direction-of-ar- and U, I T d / 6 , then the probability that no extraneous
rival sorting by an interception receiver that monitored a pulses arrive within the window is ( 1 - 6 0 , / T ~ / ) ~ - l .
single spectral region rather than the total hopping band. Therefore, for a symbol of a targeted signal,
V . TIME-OF-ARRIVAL SORTING
Signal sorting on the basis of the times of arrival of the
frequency-hopping pulses is possible if the hopping rates
are known or can be accurately estimated. To simplify the If it is necessary that P,, IPso for a communication sys-
subsequent analysis, it is assumed that the hopping rates tem to be jammed, then T,,j < T,I is required, and (4) yields
and, hence, the hop durations of the signals emanating the requirement that
from designated targets are perfectly estimated. If J fre-
quency-hopping signals are to be jammed, then these J
signals must be isolated from all other intercepted signals.
It is assumed that for each of these J signals, an initial Combining (17) and ( 1 8 ) , we obtain an upper bound on
pulse can be identified. The interception receiver then uses U, that must be satisfied if the repeater is to be successful.
the known hop duration to establish a time window within The result is
which the leading edge, or possibly the center, of the next
pulse is expected to occur. All pulses that do not have
leading edges within this window are rejected. Thus, the
pulses emanating from a single source can be identified
and jammed. From the Cramer-Rao inequality, it is found that an
The correct pulse is sorted only if it arrives within the unbiased estimate of the arrival time of one pulse relative
assigned time window. It is assumed that if more than one to another one in the presence of white Gaussian noise
pulse arrives within this window, the repeater ignores must satisfy [ I ]
them all. Therefore, if N frequency-hopping signals are -1/2
detectable in the spectral band monitored by the intercep-
(20)
tion receiver, then P, is upper bounded by the probability NO
TORRIERI: FUNDAMENTAL LlMlTATlONS ON REPEATER JAMMING 573

where /3, is a function of the spectral characteristics of the


pulses. For a signal with a uniform Fourier transform over N = 100, Tpl = 1.0 ms
a one-sided bandwidth B , ------
- NN == 100, Tp, = 0.5 ms
100, Tpr = 0.1 ms
-.--- N = 30 T - 0.5 ms
T2B2 N = 30: 1;: I 0.1 ms
i3; =3. (21)

Substituting (21) and E / N o = piBT into (20), we obtain

(22)

Substituting T 5 T,, and combining (22) and (19), we


determine the minimum value of pi necessary for success-
ful jamming. The result is

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1
Td (msl
Fig. 4. Required signal-to-noise ratio for time-of-arrival sorting as func-
tion of pulse dwell time. Parameter values are P , , , = 0. I , F, = 0.29, F,,,
= 0, dz + d, - d , = 30 km, and B = 25 kHz.

(23)
which is valid provided that Td ( P , - Fri,) < ( Td - TriJ) V O W E L L TIME-:
I I
( F , - FIv ). If the latter inequality is not satisfied, then
neither (19) nor (23) can be satisfied.
As an example, consider an extension of the examples ,
1 '
RISE
1
'
,

1TIME
FALL IC
I

given in Sections I1 and IV. Let Pro = 0.1, FJ = 0.29, I TIME 7 I

+
Flil = 0, d2 d3 - d l = 30 km, and B = 25 kHz. Fig. I TIME ?-
-HOP DURATION-
4 shows the lower bound on pI as a function of T,/ for
various combinations of N and Tpr, The curves indicate Fig. 5 . Time durations associated with a pulse.
that a large value of T,:, which is necessary to accom-
modate a long observation interval, is useful to the re- no output. The switching time is the dead time plus the
peater only if T,Iexceeds some minimum value. rise time and the fall time of a pulse. The nonzero switch-
The ideal time-of-arrival sorting described in this sec- ing time decreases the duration of transmitted symbols,
tion depends upon a fixed interval between the frequency- which in turn affects the transmitted spectrum. The dwell
hopping pulses generated by a single transmitter. If the time of a pulse is the duration of the dwell interval during
targeted communication system uses a variable interval, which the pulse has its full amplitude and the channel
time-of-arrival sorting is much more difficult. symbols are transmitted. A buffer circuit is required to
Most of the preceding results are derived under the as- store code or data symbols during the switching time. The
sumption that there are many symbols per pulse. The contents of the buffer are extracted and transmitted during
modifications for other cases, such as the transmission of the dwell time.
one symbol per pulse, are straightforward. The switching time, T,,,., plus the dwell time, Td,,, is
VI. LIMITATIONS O N HOPPINGRATE
equal to the hop duration, Th;that is,
The obvious response to a threat of repeater jamming Th = Td,, + T,,,. . (24)
is to increase the hopping rate. However, the following The rise time, T,, plus the fall time, T f , plus the dead
three major problems arise as the hopping rate increases: time, Tde,is equal to Tsw;that is,
1) the cost of the frequency synthesizer increases and its
reliability decreases, 2) synchronization becomes more T,, = T, Tde , (25) + +
difficult, and 3) limitations on the switching time become Let y denote the required transmission rate of channel
obstacles. The third problem, which usually poses the symbols. The number of symbols that must be transmitted
most fundamental limitations on the hopping rate, is ana- during a hop interval is yT,, if this number is constant
lyzed in this section. from hop to hop. Therefore,
The various time durations associated with each pulse
of a frequency-hopping signal are illustrated in Fig. 5. y Th Ts, Tdw =(26)
The hop duration is the duration of the time interval be- where T, denotes the duration of a channel symbol trans-
tween changes in frequency, which is called the hop in- mitted during the dwell time. Combining (24) to (26), we
terval. The dead time is the duration of the part of the hop obtain
interval during which the frequency synthesizer produces Th( 1 - y T , ) = T, Tf Tde. (27) + +
514 IEEE JOURNAL ON SELECTED AREAS IN COMMUNICATIONS. VOL. I. NO. 4. MAY 1989

This equation indicates that y I 1 / T 5 , which is obvious For voice communications, the lowering of y requires an
from the definitions. increase in the implementation complexity and possibly a
The switching time usually cannot be arbitrarily de- loss of voice quality. A substantial increase in rr may re-
creased for the following reasons. quire an increase in the bandwidth of a frequency channel
1) To limit the transmission of spurious frequencies beyond the conventional 25 or 50 kHz.
when an indirect frequency synthesizer is used, it may be Consider a frequency-hopping system for which there
necessary to inhibit the transmitter output during fre- are no problems of multiple-access interference or spec-
quency transitions. tral splatter. If a direct frequency synthesizer [6] is used,
2) If a pulse rises too abruptly, ringing in the output of it is possible to adequately suppress spurious frequencies
the receiver’s intermediate-frequency (IF) filter may se- while keeping T,, negligibly small relative to Td,,..Sup-
riously degrade the first symbol of the dwell interval. pose that there is no code symbol transmitted during the
3) Time may be needed for the IF filter to recover from first T, seconds of the dwell interval. This tactic prevents
one pulse before the next one is received. the amplitude changes, phase changes, and effects of the
4) Spectral splatter, which is the spectral overlap in ex- IF filter memory from affecting the first code or data sym-
traneous frequency channels produced by a time-limited bol in the dehopped signal. Therefore, Th = TdM= yTh T,
transmitted pulse, increases as the rise and fall time de- + T,. Using rh = 1/ T h and r, = 1/ T , , we obtain
crease.
rh = r, - y. (30)
The first symbol of the dwell interval may be seriously
degraded by the phase discontinuities in the dehopped sig- This requirement is clearly much different from that given
nal. A phase discontinuity may be caused by 1) a Doppler by (29).
shift, 2) frequency-selective fading, 3) a nonzero dead
VII. COMMENTS A N D CONCLUSIONS
time, or 4) imperfect synchronization in the receiver.
For combat net radios [3]-[5], which often operate in Since the very beginning of the use of frequency-hop-
close proximity to combat net radios in different nets, the ping communications, the specter of repeater jamming has
most serious limitation on the switching time is often due loomed in the minds of system developers. In this paper,
to the spectral splatter. The spectral splatter from one fre- the Cramer-Rao inequality and other fundamental rela-
quency-hopping signal can cause errors in the reception tions are used to probe the ultimate limits of the effec-
of another frequency-hopping signal even though the two tiveness of a repeater jammer. A lower bound on T, the
signals have widely separated instantaneous carrier fre- duration of the observation interval required for frequency
quencies [ 13. To reduce the amount of splatter into nearby estimation, is derived in Section 111. In Section IV, a lower
nets and to limit the other deleterious effects of a small bound is derived for J , the number of frequency-hopping
switching time, it is necessary that neither T,. nor Tr be signals that must be simultaneously jammed when direc-
much less than T,, which is itself largely determined by tion-of-arrival sorting is used. In Sections IV and V, lower
the bandwidth of a single frequency channel and the need bounds are derived for p I , the required signal-to-noise ra-
to limit the splatter. Thus, we require that tio in one frequency channel at the input to the intercep-
tion receiver, when either direction-of-arrival or time-of-
min (T,., T,-) > CYT,, (28) arrival sorting is used.
where CY is a constant that typically satisfies 1 ICY I4. Considerably larger values of p l , J, and T than are in-
The exact value of CY is a function of the shapes of the dicated by the bounds may be required for the following
pulse edges. reasons.
Let rh = 1/ Th denote the hopping rate and r, = 1/T, 1) The Cramer-Rao bound is known to be usually loose
denote the symbol rate during the dwell interval. Substi- whenE/No < 10dB.
tuting (28) into (27), we obtain 2) Even if the Cramer-Rao bound is tight, it remains a
r - ,. bound that can only be attained by an ideal estimator. A
practical estimator, such as an adaptive thresholding sys-
tem for arrival-time estimation [I], may well exhibit a
This inequality must be satisfied if the spectral splatter, significantly larger standard deviation than is indicated by
and possibly the other problems arising from a short the Cramer-Rao bound.
switching time, are to be accommodated. 3) Various idealizations, such as the perfect estimation
As an example of the application of (as), consider dig- of the hopping rate in time-of-arrival sorting, are made to
ital communications with y = 16 kbits/s, which is the keep the analysis tractable.
standard rate in combat net radios. Let Tde = 0, r, = 20 4) The time required for processing may be signifi-
kbits/s, and CY = 1. Inequality (29) then yields rh < 2 cantly larger than the length of the observation interval;
khops/s. The fraction of the time that symbols are trans- that is, T 5 Tprmay provide a loose bound.
mitted is Td,/Th = y T , = y / r s = 0.8. If CY = 2, then rh 5) Multipath signals degrade both direction-of-arrival
< I khop/s. From these results, it appears that combat and time-of-arrival sorting.
net radios cannot have hopping rates greater than 1 to 2 Despite the potential looseness of the derived bounds,
khops/s unless either 1) serious spectral splatter and other they indicate important irreducible limitations on the ex-
problems are tolerated, 2) y is lowered, or 3) r, is raised. tent of the repeater threat.
T O R R I E R I : F U N D A M E N T A L L I M I T A T I O N S ON R E P E A T E R J A M M I N G 575

The parameter values chosen in the numerical examples 131 P. J . Munday and M . C . Pinches, "Jaguar-V frequency-hopping radio
system,'' IEE Proc., vol. 129. pt. F , p. 213, June 1982.
of Sections 11, IV, and V are those typical of a combat net 141 D. M. Russell, "Tactical radios designed to elude enemy jammers."
radio and a high-power jammer. If the radio hops at a rate Dejense Elecrrori., vol. I I O , June 1983.
of 500 hops/s or more and transmits energy during ap- 151 M. Kachmar, "SINCGARS from ITT-The Army's radios grow up,"
Microwaves & RF. vol. 29. Apr. 1984.
proximately 80 percent of a hop interval so that T,, 5 1.6 161 U. Rohde. Digital PLL Frequency Syrirhesi;crs. Englewood Cliffs.
ms, the analysis indicates that a repeater will be faced NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1983.
with a severe challenge when many frequency-hopping
communicators are present. However, if T(, > 3 ms,
which is true for all or nearly all currently used or planned
combat net radios, then signal sorting and successful re-
peater jamming are potentially much simpler. In Section Don J . Torrieri received the B S degree from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cam-
VI, the limitations on the hopping rate are examined. bridge, the M S degree from the Polytechnic
From the results, it appears that a combat net radio that University, New York, and the Ph.D. degree i n
hops at 500-1000 hops/s is a viable possibility, but one electrophysics from the University of Maryland.
College Park.
that hops at more than 1 khop/s may create unacceptable He ha5 analyzed electronic systems at the Nd-
levels of spectral splatter and other practical problems. val Research Laboratory, Washington, DC. and
since 1977 he has been employed by the United
REFERENCES States Army His primary interests are the analy-
sis and assessment of communication systems and
[ 11 D. Torrieri, Principles of Secure Communication Systems. Dedham. electronic countermeasures He is the author of Princrples of Secure Coni-
MA: Artech House, 1985. munication Systems (Dedham, MA. Artech House, 1985) and a contributor
[2] L. Van Brunt, Applied ECM, Vol. I . Dunn Loring, VA: EW Engi- to Acousro-Optic Signal Processrng (N. J . Berg and J N. Lee, Eds , New
neering, 1978. York: Marcel Dekker, 1983)

You might also like