International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XXXIX-B7, 2012 
XXII ISPRS Congress, 25 August — 01 September 2012, Melbourne, Australia 
appears to be greater near +45° ellipticity angle, 
indicating higher circular response. Water is an 
excellent specular reflector, thus leading to 
greater forward scattering and less backscatter 
of the EM waves. 
  
EE EEE 
  
Ee E Tr RT 
   
* 
  
  
  
Se 
— 
  
  
Co-polarized Signature ^ Cross-polarized Signature 
Figure 3.4(a): Polarimetric response of Waterbody 
4. CONCLUSION 
In this study, a tool named “POLSIC”, with 
basic capability to calculate and represent 3D 
Polarimetric signatures (Co-polarized and Cross 
polarized) has been developed, still in an 
experimentation phase, in order to encourage 
and develop Polarimetric signature studies of 
various possible targets/class. The polarimetric 
signatures generated for various urban targets, 
were studied and following conclusions were 
made: It was found that all the built up 
structures (buildings, roads and bridge) and the 
agriculture  fields/vegetated areas showed 
greater Co-polarization response than the Cross 
polarization response. The open field and water 
body showed greater Cross polarization 
response as compared to the above mentioned 
features. The vegetated land, built up-1(within 
city), built up within water body, road-1 were 
found to have an overall higher polarimetric 
response (backscattered power) as compared to 
plantation, built up-2, bridge, road-2, open field 
and minimum in case of water body, due to 
factors like surface roughness and orientation of 
the target with respect to the radar look angle. 
Also rough surfaces like buildings, trees, 
agricultural fields, etc., cause greater multiple 
scattering as compared to the smoother surfaces 
like fallow land, water body, etc. The smoother 
surfaces (water body, open field) have lower 
backscattered power values. The minimum 
intensity indicates the pedestal height of the 
polarization signature. The rougher surfaces 
have more multiple scattering and therefore 
540 
higher pedestal heights than the smoother 
surfaces. Thus, the shape of the signature also 
indicates the scattering characteristics. In case 
of built up areas, roads and bridge, it is found 
that the predominant polarization intensity 
differs with the height, shape and the alignment 
direction of the former, thus giving differences 
in the polarimetric responses of each. 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
The authors are thankful to Dr. S.K. Pathan and 
Ms. Shweta Sharma for her valuable guidance 
and support. 
REFERENCES 
References from Journals: 
[1] Fiset R. and M. Farhat, A low cost 
polarimetric response tool using 
spreadsheets, International Geoscience and 
Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS 
2001), 9-13 July, 2001. 
References from Books: 
[2] Fawwaz T. Ulaby, Charles Elachi, Radar 
Polarimetry for Geoscience Applications, 
Artech House, Boston, London,1990, pp. 
17-50. ; 
[3] Floyd M. Henderson, Anthony J.Lewis, 
Principles and Applications of Imaging 
Radar, Manual of Remote Sensing, Third 
edition, Vol.2, pp.120, 140, 296-299. 
[4] lain H. Woodhouse, Introduction to 
Microwave Remote Sensing, CRC press, 
2006. 
Reference from Websites: 
[5] Paper on *A low-cost Polarimetric response 
tool using spreadsheets", Canadian Space 
Agency, Canada. (http://www.asc- 
csa.ge.ca/pdt/radarsat? polarimetry toolsdb 
-pdf) 
    
  
[6] Tutorial on Radar Polarimetry by Natural 
Resources Canada. 
(http://www .nrcan.ge.ca/earth- 
sciences/geography-boundary/remote 
sensing/fundamentals/1025)