1 / 21

Project Echelon: Surveillance of Long, Linear, Static Structures The OSU Team Kickoff

Project Echelon: Surveillance of Long, Linear, Static Structures The OSU Team Kickoff. January 2004. Retreat Goals. To think through & document : Requirements User, Hardware, Middleware & Application Metrics Operational & Technical Process Roles Internal & External.

Download Presentation

Project Echelon: Surveillance of Long, Linear, Static Structures The OSU Team Kickoff

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Project Echelon: Surveillance of Long, Linear, Static StructuresThe OSU Team Kickoff January 2004

  2. Retreat Goals To think through & document: • Requirements • User, Hardware, Middleware & Application • Metrics • Operational & Technical • Process • Roles • Internal & External

  3. New Team Members • Rajiv Ramnath: Project Management • Prasun Sinha: Tier 2 (802.11a) Networking • Emre Ertin: our EE person  Signal Processing Hardware

  4. Concept of OperationsPrimary Effort Problem: • Too vast an area for limited personnel resources (mobile guards) • Hostile actions: • Destruction (explosives) • Damage to pumps and transformers • Stripping of copper power lines (for pumps) Operational Need: • Reliable automated surveillance to detect movement in security zone FY04 Experiment: • Sense movement of personnel and/or vehicles toward the pipeline • Track the movement and the stop/start of movement Pipeline Damage in Iraq

  5. Concept of Operations (cont.)Primary Effort Detection and tracking of vehicles Mobile Patrol Pipeline 10 km Pump Station Detection of unknowns ? Guard Force Alerted Pipeline Security Zone Detection and tracking of personnel 1 km Reaction Force

  6. CONOPSRelated Efforts Similar Long, Linear, Static Structures Enemy Observation Point (OP) Surveillance of Supply Routes: • Detect potential ambush sites: • Personnel w/shoulder fired weapons (e.g., RPGs) • IEDs FY04 Experiment: • Sense movement of personnel/vehicles toward supply route, and then: • They remain near a point • They remain for a while and then leave • Sense suspicious movement on the road Wire to OP IED IED

  7. Candidate Applications Convoy protection 1D Detect anomalous driving patterns on road Convoy protection 2D Detect anomalous activity along roadside Hide Site IED

  8. CONOPSRelated Efforts Similar Long, Linear, Static Structures Border Surveillance: • Detect illegal border crossings: • U.S. Customs • Military operations in Iraq FY04 Experiment: • Detect movement of personnel/vehicles across area adjacent to a border

  9. Comparison Delay tolerance Hot problem Full network Existing comms No alternative Processing load Existing sensors Hardware tolerance Cost/length CONOPS Kansas Pipeline Northern border Colombian Pipeline 2D Convoy protection 1D Convoy protection

  10. Operational Metrics Latency <10 seconds (90% of the time) Probability of False Alarm (Pfa) <1 per day Probability of Detection (Pd) 0.99 for vehicles 0.95 for dismounts Classification TBD XSM Node Lifetime TBD Relay Node Lifetime TBD Network Deployment time <1 hour Network Uninstallation time < 1 hour Cost Per node Per unit area covered Technical Metrics Robustness Of node Of network Sensor coverage Sensor density Effective bandwidth Of first-tier network Of second-tier network Endurance Of node Of network Preliminary Program PlanSystem Metrics

  11. Preliminary Program PlanTechnology Transition • Transition Partners • Transition Process • Joint DARPA/Partner identification of operational challenges and potential solutions • DARPA development of technical solution to operational challenges • Joint evaluation of technical solution • Joint Memorandum of Agreeement (MOA) / Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

  12. Experiment Site Characteristics • Relatively flat, open area • Easy for observers to see large section of experiment site • No forests • No large physical obstructions to line-of-site comms • Relatively good weather (little rain, light winds, etc.)

  13. Final Demo Experiment Sites Candidate Sites • Naval Air Weapons Facility, China Lake • 150 miles NE of Los Angeles • Encompasses 1.1 million acres of land in California's upper Mojave Desert, ranging in altitude from 2,100 to 8,900 feet • Varies from flat dry lake beds to rugged piñon pine covered mountains. • Weather should be consistent • Summer will be hot

  14. WPAFB Experiment Site The area in the red ellipse is the one for the test range. It is approximately 7500’ x 2500’.

  15. Another “improvised” view of the area.

  16. OSU Experiment Site Don Scott Airfield North Runway area: .5km x .5km Internal Testbed Space Candidates • North Rec Centre (floor) • Warehouses in Kinnear or Goodale area (may have to pay for space)

  17. Preliminary Program PlanRoles and Responsibilities Systems Integration Ohio State Technology Development Sensors Crossbow Xtreme Scaling Mote Crossbow Technology Relay Node Crossbow Technology Display Unit Ohio State GUI Ohio State Application Layer Ohio State UC Berkeley Middleware Services • Clock Sync (UCLA,OSU) • Group Formation (OSU, UCB) • Localization (UIUC) • Remote Programming (UCB) • Routing (OSU, UCB) • Sensor Fusion (OSU) • Power Management (UCB) • Relay Node Services (UCLA) Operating System UC Berkeley Application Tools Ohio State UCLA UC Berkeley MAC Layer UC Berkeley Auxiliary Services • Testing (OSU, MITRE, CNS Technologies) • Monitoring, logging, and testing infrastructure (UCB, OSU) • Evaluation (MITRE) • Logistics, site planning (CNS Technologies, OSU) • ConOps development (Puritan Research, CNS Technologies, SouthCom, US Customs & Border Protection, MITRE, OSU) • Simulation tools (UCB, UCLA, Vanderbilt, OSU) Transition Partners USSOUTHCOM, U.S. Customs & Border Protection, USSOCOM, AFRL

  18. Agenda (Friday) 9am                Team introduction; Goals for the retreat    Preliminary Application and ConOps                        Requirements and Metrics                       Hardware, Middleware, Application Architecture overview  10am              Risks (Rajiv Ramnath) 10:30-11am     TimeSync (Ted Herman) 11am-12noon   Localization (Ted Herman)12-1pm            Lunch brought in (Oxleys)1-1:45pm         Echelon topology (SK)1:45-2:15pm    Clustering & Group Management (MD)2:00-3pm        Simulation (Mikhail Nesterenko)3:15-4:00pm    Monitoring  (SB)4-5pm             Power management (SK)  6:15pm            Out-of-towners Dinner (Host: Prof. CK Chang, China Dynasty on Lane Ave)

  19. Agenda (Saturday) 9am                Routing (Mohamed Gouda, HZ)10-10:30         TDMA (Sandeep Kulkarni, HZ)10:30-noon      Localization (w/ Gul Agha: (217)359-0789)12-1:30pm       Lunch brought in (Chipotle) 1:30-2pm         Border Patrol (Rajiv Ramnath)  2-3pm    Tier 2 networking (Prasun Sinha)3-4pm         Hardware (PD, Emre Ertin, HC)                 Antenna discussion4:00-5:00         Process discussion (Rajiv Ramnath)     5pm                 Budget5:15pm            ALineInTheSand writeups & planning6pm Dinner (Everyone to Anish's residence)

  20. Agenda (Sunday) 9am Taking Stock, Planning 9:30-11:30 Requirements and Metrics Application, ConOps, Hardware specifications 11:30am-1   New research ideas:                   MobiLoc                   BGP

  21. To Do • Sign Up for Lunch

More Related