Mitigation of Target Tracking Errors and sUAS Response Using Multi Sensor Data Fusion

  • David S. R. KondruEmail author
  • Mehmet Celenk
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10884)


Developing tactical or strategic methods to counter the small Unmanned Aerial System (sUAS) threats is effectively pacing up. With the advent of unprecedented proliferation of malicious or unintended intrusion from drones, the national infrastructure could be at risk and can become vulnerable if detection, tracking and disruption of these sUAS employed with electronic counter measures are at stake. Anticipating the boom in counter UAS technology, this paper presents methods and state estimation techniques based on multi sensor data fusion to mitigate position errors caused by electronic counter measures. A complete mathematical modeling and simulation of the proposed system for further research is presented. Two sensors namely RADAR and FLIR (Forward Looking Infrared) and their mathematical models are considered in this paper. A state variable approach to describe the motion characteristics of the target and sensor measurement model is utilized and performance evaluation of tracking filters are investigated. The experimental results in MATLAB show fusion architectures that demonstrate better tracking results with less residual errors. Also, for a nonlinear target motion the robust particle filter proves its nature and achieves desired response.


sUAS Detection Tracking State estimators Sensor fusion 


  1. 1.
    Countering-the-CUAS-shortcomings, Whitepaper,, SRC Inc., September 2016Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Warrick, J.: Use of Weaponized Drones, The Washington Post, February 2017Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bramlett, S.: U.S. Army Aviation & Missile Research Development & Engineering Center (AMRDEC), Redstone Arsenal, AlabamaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Peck, M.: The National Interest: How the U.S. Army Plans to Defeat the Unthinkable: Drone Swarms, Defence Military Strategy, 18 January 2015Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stevenson, B.: Anglo-French Consortium to Develop Anti-UAV System,, London, 26 June 2015Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stevenson, B.: British Smes Develop System to Counter UAVs,, London, 19 May 2016Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Phalanx Close-In Weapon System. Raytheon Company (2018).
  8. 8.
    Silent Strike- Boeing’s Compact Laser Weapons System. Boeing, 27 August 2015.
  9. 9.
    Egozi, A.: RAFAEL Unveils Drone Dome Anti-Uav System, Flightglobal.Com, Tel Aviv, 12 April 2016Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    UAV White Paper, HGH Infrared Systems (2015).
  11. 11.
    Weatherington, D.: Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Unmanned Warfare, OUSD(AT&L)/PSA, 20 April 2010Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li, C.J., Ling, H.: Radar signatures of small consumer drones, AP-S/USNC-URCI, IEEE, Puerto Rico (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Samczynsk, P., Kulpa, K., Baczyk, M.K., Gromek, D.: SAR/ISAR imaging in passive radars. In: 2016 IEEE Radar Conference, Philadelphia, PA, USA (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fuhr, P.: Unmanned aerial systems, tech advances – on & over the horizon. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Commercial Drone Expo, 9 April 2016Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yildiz, K., Pace, P.E., Tummala, M.: Electronic attack against boost-phase ICBM defense system. In: 2005 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 12 October 2005Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yildiz, K.: Electronic attack and sensor fusion techniques for boost-phase defense against multiple ballistic threat missiles. Master’s thesis, Department of Information Sciences, Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California, June 2005Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Adamy, D.L.: EW 104: Electronic Warfare Against a New Generation of Threats. Artech House Publication (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    White, J., Archer, C., Haidt, J.G., Britt, C.L., Neece, R.: Fusion of airborne radar and FLIR sensors for runway incursion detection. In: IEEE/AIAA 28th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 23–29 October 2009Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, K., Jia, H., Zhang, W., Tian, Z.: A design of data fusion software system for laser radar and FLIR. In: First International Conference on Intelligent Networks and Intelligent Systems, Wuhan, China, 1–3 November 2008Google Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Zarchan, P.: Tactical and Strategic Missile Guidance, vol. 239. AIAA (2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grewal, M.S., Andrews, A.P.: Kalman Filtering Theory and Practice Using MATLAB, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rogers, R.M.: Applied Mathematics in Integrated Navigation Systems. AIAA Education Series, July 2000Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lesson 2 - Projectile Motion, Projectile Motion and Inertia, The Physics Classroom (1996–2017).
  25. 25.
    Gordon, N.J., Salmond, D.J., Smith, A.F.: Novel approach to nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian state estimation. In: IEE Proceedings-F, vol. 140, no. 2, April 1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shimkin, N.: Estimation and Identification in Dynamical Systems, Lecture Notes, Fall 2009, Department of Electrical Engineering, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology (2009)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barton, D.K., Leonov, S.A.: Radar Technology Encyclopedia. Artech House Inc. (1998)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jenn, D.C.: POFACETS 4.3 - Radar cross section (RCS) prediction code based on the physical optics (PO) approximation, 23 April 2015.–3
  29. 29.
    Keefer, C.W.: Infrared target detection: signal and noise sensitivity analysis. Master’s thesis, School of Engineering of the Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, December 1989Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gan, Q., Harris, C.J.: Comparison of two measurement fusion methods for Kalman-filter-based multisensor data fusion. IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 37(1), 273–279 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Naidu, V.P.S.: Fusion of radar and IRST sensor measurements for 3D target tracking using extended Kalman filter. Def. Sci. J. 59(2), 175–182 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bar-Shalom, Y., Li, X.: Estimation and Tracking: Principles, Techniques, and Software’s. Artech House, London (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Simon, D.: Optimal State Estimation-Kalman, HInfinity, and Nonlinear Approaches. Cleveland State University. Wiley, Hoboken (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    LaViola, J.J.: A comparison of unscented and extended Kalman filtering for estimating quaternion motion. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, June 2006Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wan, E.A., van der Merwe, R.: The unscented Kalman filter for nonlinear estimation. In: Proceedings of the Adaptive Systems for Signal Processing, Communications, and Control Symposium, October 2000Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wu, P., Li, X., Zhang, L., Bo, Y.: Tracking algorithm with radar and infrared sensors using a novel adaptive grid interacting multiple model. J. IET Sci. Meas. Technol. 8(5), 270–276 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceOhio UniversityAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations