introduction to engineering design - penn state … · • locate intruders crossing into your...

Introduction to Engineering Design

Penn State

RPV Border Surveillance System

Engineering Project Kickoff

October 12, 2005

Kickoff Agenda

• Introduction to the Project

• Overview of project steps

– Modeling and Simulation

– CONOPS (CONcept of OPerationS) Development

– Requirements Development

– Concept Generation

– Concept Development

– Concept Presentation

• Summary

• Appendices & Back-up material

• Questions and Discussion

BAE SYSTEMS Freshman Design Project Team Members

Name PSU Degree BAE SYSTEMS Position

Paul Hoffman BS Engr Sci Director, Supportability Engineering

Mark Carlson Engineering Fellow, Aerodynamics

Joe Furino University Relations Manager

Eric Vogel BS ME Principal Systems Engineer

Zane Lo PhD EE Engineering Fellow, Electrical

Karl Brommer Engineering Fellow, Electrical

Project Statement

• Problem statement:

– Manned surveillance of borders is cost prohibitive. Fixed ground sensors, if located,

can be disabled rendering them ineffective until maintained or replaced.

– An approach to providing a reliable surveillance method for extended periods of time is

required using an economical sensor suite to cover a wide variety of terrain.

• Objective: Develop a mobile surveillance system concept for the patrol of a large

border segment which detects the presence of intruders.

– Assume that your system interfaces directly to a transmitter for relay of observations to

the control center.

– Will need to cover all types of terrain.

• Background

– Your team is employed by a specialty engineering firm.

– The firm has been contracted to develop airborne surveillance concepts for border

patrol.

– The customer has awarded several contracts to competing firms and will ultimately

select the best concept for a lucrative development, production, and fielding contract.

• This is a real problem with real impact in today’s world

– Solving it literally makes the country a safer place.

– There are many other practical application areas for this technology.

• Ex: Search and rescue Hurricanes Katrina and Rita

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=104453

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=104453

Project Statement Of Work (SOW)

• Tasks: Your firm will need to:

– Perform a customer needs assessment based on your interpretation of the problem scope

– Develop an initial Concept Of Operations (CONOPS)

• The CONOPS is essential and defines how your system will actually operate.

• Your CONOPS will evolve as your system architecture matures.

– Develop a draft of your system specification

• This will evolve as your system architecture develops

• Select a sensor suite from the list of devices provided

– Perform trade studies on the type and quantity of sensors, type and quantity of vehicles required, how the vehicles are employed, and information provided versus cost.

– Determine payload weight, payload power required.

– Select a battery system and determine endurance of payload system

– Design a system using the results of the trade studies including optimal sensor placement, integration with the vehicle, etc.

– Calculate size and mass properties of the payload

– Develop the cost to field the system. i.e., number and type of vehicles, number of sensors, etc.

Project Approach

• This project will lead you through a disciplined systems engineering

approach to engineering concept development

– Perform a customer needs assessment

– Understand the problem via hand analysis, modeling, and simulation

– Develop the requirements for your system concept

– Generate ideas for the border surveillance system concept

– Refine the ideas through concept development

– Select your best concept and develop it in detail

• Develop your CONcept of OPerationS (CONOPS)

– Assess your systems strengths and weaknesses

– Sell your final idea to the customer

• Tools you will use: Mathematics, physics, spreadsheets,

brainstorming, trade studies, CAD, presentation SW

– The tools support your creative process

*Additional Information on Project Approach is provided in Appendix A-1

Background

Requirements

• Locate intruders crossing into your territory and report their position.

• Determine the best method of patrolling your border segment and the number and type of vehicles employed.

– The border segment you have to patrol is 100 kilometers in length with terrain which could consist of desert, mountains, valleys, open fields, water and forest. See definition provided on slide 12.

– Border must be monitored 24 / 7 with no breaks in continuity for one week.

– You must keep track of the intruder for a border crossing depth of 1 km.

– Assume 3 intruder penetrations / 24 hrs.

• Check out this web site for some fascinating views of surveillance work done with Navy RPV’s

– http://uav.navair.navy.mil

Border Patrol Requirements

http://uav.navair.navy.mil/

RPV History

• UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle

– First UAV in this country was in 1863

during Civil War

• Unmanned balloon used as a “bomber”

Not truly guided, but patented

– Ironically, almost since the beginning of

powered manned flight, (1903)

engineers have tried to figure out how

to remove man from the cockpit.

– Origin Arguably the first successful

UAV built in quantity was the Kettering

Bug, produced as an “Aerial Torpedo” in

1918.

– Since then UAV’s moved forward into

the combat arena and the first practical

use against a major target occurred

during WWII when VI and VII weapons

were utilized against London.

– Today UAV’s are becoming increasing

sophisticated and span the full range of

technologies, finding increasing use as

surveillance platforms

Kettering Aerial Torpedo, circa 1918

The Kettering Aerial Torpedo, nicknamed the "Bug",

was invented by Charles F. Kettering of Dayton. It was

developed and built by Dayton-Wright Airplane Company

in 1918 for the U.S. Army Signal Corps.

SPECIFICATIONS

Span: 14 ft. 11 1/2 in.

Length: 12 ft. 6 in.

Height: 4 ft. 8 in.

Weight: 530 lbs. loaded

Armament: 180 lbs. of high explosive

Engine: One De Palma four-cylinder of 40 hp.

PERFORMANCE

Design speed: 120 mph.

Range: 75 miles

Typical UAV Configurations

*Additional data on UAV’s is provided in Appendix A-2

Global Hawk ≈ $ 40M, Endurance up to 35 hr Predator ≈ $ 4M, Endurance 24 hr on station

Pioneer ≈ $ 0.9M, Endurance 5 hr AeroVironment’s Wasp < $ 0.1 M, endurance 1.2 hrs

Typical UGV (Unmanned Ground Vehicles)

Configurations

• Other types of remote vehicles include

Unmanned Ground Vehicles or UGV’s

• Examples arguably include a pair of the

most famous “twins”, Spirit and Opportunity,

sponsored by JPL (Jet Propulsion

Laboratory)

– Both rovers have demonstrated performance

well beyond expectations including recovering

from unplanned performance difficulties.

• Armed forces, police departments, and

search and rescue operations now rely on

ground rovers for checking out high risk

scenarios.

– Entering burning buildings to check for

trapped occupants.

– Police bomb squads for identification and

disposal of ordnance.

– Ground surveillance, USMA Dragon-Runner,

lower right, for entry into hot zones and

identifying occupants http://robotics.jpl.nasa.gov/

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/spacecraft/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/dragon-runner.htm

Mars Rovers Spirit and Opportunity

Marine Corp Dragon-Runner

http://robotics.jpl.nasa.gov/

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/spacecraft/




UV’s as Small, Tactical Surveillance

Platforms Are Here Today

• UV’s of various form factors are

currently deployed in a myriad of

situations in both the armed forces of

the world and many civilian

organizations

• An example in current use today is the

Dragoneye UAV, upper right

– Man portable to the location needed.

– Durable and re-usable.

– Provides a real time picture of over the

horizon terrain to decision makers for

immediate action.

– Man in the loop operation.

• Fully autonomous versions of UV’s are

available now.

• BAE SYSTEMS produces a fully

autonomous platform for surveillance

– Capable of vertical take off and landing

(VTOL) as well as hover, loiter and

flight in any direction

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week

Modeling and Simulation

Requirements Development

Concept Generation

Concept Analysis/Selection

Concept Presentation

Notional Project Schedule

CONOPS Development

• Illustrated below is an example task breakdown for this project.

• Your faculty advisor will tailor / facilitate your specific tasking and scheduling

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week


Requirements development

Concept Generation




CONOPS development

Inputs • UAV/UGV Background Info • Sensor Information • Battery Information • Modeling approach • Modeling equations • Model inputs (constants) • Self-check tools

Outputs • Parametric planar vehicle model

• Sensor coverage using defined FOV • Battery / Power requirements def.

• Physical understanding of problem

Modeling and Simulation Scenario

Hint: approximate your

terrain model as a set of

straight line segments then define

your flight path and number of

vehicles required

0.35 km

• Apply Newtonian physics to develop a mathematical, parametric model of the

UV patrol approach over the terrain

– Kinematics is the general class of physics that will be applied

• Modeling Objectives:

– Determine optimal operational altitude, flight speed, ground or water track, and

sensor placement on aircraft in order to maximize coverage.

• Your CONOPS will be critical to the modeling and may change / evolve based upon your

results

– Gain a physical understanding of the sensor coverage requirements and flight /

ground / boat requirements imposed on your vehicle as well as the number of

vehicles required to cover the terrain.

Forest Desert

2.0 km

25 km 10 km 100 km 27 km 50 km 55 km 75 km 80 km

0.10 km

0.50 km

Water

Mountain

Note: Example shown is for a UAV based system. Your

system will be different based on sensor, platform, CONOPS

trades.

Mathematical modeling

Outputs

• Values that you will determine

via the model – Quantity of vehicles required,

sensor type employed, battery

capacity / type.

• Will be determined as a

function of the input variables – i.e. Flight profile vs. time,

velocity, acceleration, flyout

time vs. range, ground speed /

track boat speed, etc.

• Develop model using kinematics equations, constants, variables, and

desired outputs

Constants

• Values that will not change for

the model – Border terrain

– Intruder parameters

– Vehicle max acceleration

• Provided in Appendix A-3

Variables

• Values that you will vary over a

range to determine flyout times – Altitude, cruise velocity, loiter time,

etc.

– Cruising speed (boat)

– Ground speed / maneuverability

– Number of vehicles required

– Intruder motion

• Provided in Appendix A-4

Equations

• Kinematics equations

provided in Appendix A-5

Model development

• Step 1: Work the problem a few times

by hand

– Treat it like a homework assignment

– For example: How many UV’s are required to patrol the border? What

coverage do they provide, what type of sensor overlap is required, are you

going to mix UV types to optimize coverage, does the total system meet

your cost expectations?

• How will I model the system to verify performance?

– Make sure that the relationships make sense in terms of your trade space.

• Step 2: Put the equations (or assumptions) into a computer tool so you

can vary the inputs over a range and plot relationships

– Tools: Custom computer program, Excel, MatLab, MathCad, etc.

– Now the variables become ranges of values

– The “answer” is the plotted relationships and a physical understanding of

the surveillance dynamics

*Additional suggestions to Model development are provided in Appendix A-6

“What I cannot create, I do not

understand.”

— Richard Feynman,

theoretical physicist

Sample Preliminary Hand Analysis

*Additional information on sample model outputs are provided in Appendix A-7

*Tips on model/simulation are provided in Appendix A-8

2.0 km

25 km 10 km 100 km

27 km

50 km

55 km

75 km

80 km

0.10 km

0.50 km Water

Mountain

Forest Desert

0.35 km

• Consider a flight based solution:

• Need to calculate number of UAV’s required

and basic range / altitude requirements

• Simple geometric approximations will suffice

• Remember complexities may be subtle

– For example, suppose you chose a really

inexpensive MAV (Micro-Air Vehicle) which flies

@ a 100 ft altitude (relative to ground, refer to

CONOPS 2), how do you cover both sides of the

mountain?

– Clearly the trajectory (and resulting range

requirements), can no longer be approximated as

a straight line segment as in CONOPS 1 and

must be segmented and computed in pieces

using simple geometric relationships.

• During your model build up remember:

– This is tied directly to your CONOPS

• May consider multiple types of UAV’s to solve

problem

– Must consider intruder parameters

– Use model to determine type, quantity, range,

speed of UAV’s to monitor border

Original Terrain

2.0 km

25 km 10 km 100 km

27 km

50 km

55 km

75 km

80 km

0.10 km

0.50 km Water

Mountain

Forest Desert

0.35 km

CONOPS 2 Terrain following

Low altitude (Red dash)

CONOPS 1 orbit

high altitude (Yellow solid)

Discretized terrain, black, solid

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week


Requirements development

Concept Generation



CONOPS Development

CONOPS Development

Inputs • Surveillance equipment

parameters • Vehicle parameters • Surveillance approach

concept • Brainstorming technique

resource

Outputs • Definition of your

approach for system operation

• Preliminary list of required operational capabilities


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week



Concept Generation

Concept Development


Inputs • UV Operational

Parameters • Intruder scenarios • Sensor parameters

Outputs • Tables/graphs • Response performance for

given intruder scenario

CONOPS Development

Development Process

• The customer is primarily concerned with 4 major intruder

penetration scenarios

– These are the threats that your surveillance must detect and monitor

• Developing the timeline requirements means filling in this table using

your model

• Outputs:

– Show Range of Times to Respond by using Table/Graph

*Tips on development process (e.g. establishing surveillance system timeline) are provided in Appendix A-9

Border Crossing Time At Given Intercept Range

(Border width = 1 km)

Intercept Distance From Border Crossing (m)

Intrusion

Method

Target Size (m)

(L x W x H)

V T (m/s)

1000 750 500 250 100 50 25

Walking 0.75 x 0.40 x 1.80 0.75 – 2.50

Horse 2.50 x 1.00 x 4.00 10.0 – 13.0

ATV 1.90 x 1.25 x 1.60 11.0 – 22.0

Boat 9.20 x 3.00 x 1.22 7.00 – 34.0

Concept Generation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week



Concept Generation

Concept Development


CONOPS Development

Inputs

• Response-time/range requirements for UV

• Brainstorming technique resources

• Surveillance equipment and timelines

Outputs

• Complete list of brainstormed surveillance concepts (25+ items)

• Initial refinement of list (~5 items)

• Customer has specified a variety of surveillance sensors for your use

– Can be used in any quantity and configuration at the expense of cost, size,

weight and power

– See Appendix for sensor system selection guidelines

– See Appendix for sensor parameter information

– See Appendix for battery parameter information

• Your job is to come up with the actual intruder detection system

approach and concept of operations

Your Job!

• Basic intruder model is applicable to all types of engagements

– Monitor border

– Detect & Issue Warning

– Develop intruder Track

– Calculate time to cross

border

– Assess Next Action

Options for this are provided

by customer

Not part of your Timeline

A-10

A-11

A-11b

Engineering Creativity

• Apply group creative techniques

to develop a rich set of possible

solutions

– See resource material on

brainstorming and other creative

techniques, Appendix

“The way to get good ideas is to

get lots of ideas and throw the

bad ones away.”

— Linus Pauling, chemist

Nobel Prize Winner

• Session 1: Develop a large set of possible solutions (25+). At this point,

don’t critique - just record the ideas.

• Session 2: Cull the list down to 4 or 5 solutions as a group

– Use your understanding of the engagement to eliminate the weakest solutions

• Tip: Consider the type of detect/cueing sensor(s) that will be needed for

each surveillance system concept (i.e. a very cheap simple sensor may

require a vast number of vehicles but may still be less expensive than

fielding a Global Hawk based approach.)

A-12

http://www.brainstorming.co.uk/tutorials/tutorialcontents.html

Food for Thought ...

• Based on an initial assessment of the intruder threat, areas subject to

exploitation include:

– Low velocity 0.75 - 34 m/sec typical

– Relatively large target profile

• Your target is non-maneuvering

assume a straight line across border

– Terrain

• Will prove an obstacle

• Must consider shadowing, view factors,

etc.

– Think about potential system

vulnerabilities

• A countermeasure may be as simple as

the intruder maneuvering

• Perhaps calculating the time for the

intruder to move from point A to B or to

turn versus engagement geometry and

your UV kinematics would provide

insight into vehicle velocity and timing

requirements.

– Trajectory

• Your chosen vehicle motion profile must be fully

integrated with your sensor suite.

• You can use multiple UV types to perform the

surveillance mission.

– Perhaps a mix of high altitude surveillance with a

mother ship that releases expendable MAV born

sensors to monitor identified intruders coupled with a

ground based patrolling vehicle.

– Remember that the threat is prolific.

• The system may have to counter more than one

intruder at a time so think about parameters like

volume, integration onto the vehicle, kinematic

performance and numbers required.

• This is a semi-commercial application.

– It needs to be somewhat affordable.

– Think about potential commercial uses. ex.,

plant protection, environmental monitoring,

search and rescue, etc.

Concept Development

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week



Concept Generation

Concept Development


CONOPS Development

Inputs • Short list of candidates • Trade study technique

resources • Model/analysis tools • CAD resources

Outputs • Selected surveillance system

approach • Rationale for selection • Analysis of performance • Sketches/description of

concept

Engineering Selection

• Selection of the optimal surveillance system requires that you further

develop each idea on the “short list”

• Further development should focus on answering the key questions

– Will it be effective?

– How big will it be, what will it weigh, how much power does it take?

– What type and quantity of sensors are required?

– How much will it cost?

– Is it feasible?

• Use CAD to sketch your concepts and “visualize” installation

• Use your model (possibly with modifications) to determine the

effectiveness

Trade Studies

• Once you have sufficiently developed the alternatives, conduct an

engineering trade study to select the optimal approach

– Trade studies promote objective review and selection of the best

alternative

– Frequently used in industry

– See online resources regarding engineering trade studies, Appendix

• Potential trade study criteria

– Physical

• Power, weight, size

– Feasibility

• Unique technical challenges

– Cost

– Performance

• How many of the threat engagement scenarios are defeated?

A-13

“Out of clutter, find simplicity.

From discord, find harmony. In

the middle of difficulty lies

opportunity.”

— Albert Einstein

http://www.losangeles.af.mil/Tenants/SCEA/CAIV18M/reqtrade40.ppt

Sample CM Technique Trade Study

• Approach: Monitor border using a high altitude reconnaissance UAV:

– See entire border form high altitude.

– Minimize maneuverability.

– Maximize time on station.

• Possible sensor options compatible with high altitude mission:

Approach

Pros

Cons

Scanning

short range

radar

Fast reaction time

Good maximum effective range

Ability to detect all target types

Good FOV depending on number of antennas

Potential clutter problem with background

Heavy

Moderate power consumption

Scanning

LIDAR

Effective at high altitudes

Reasonable (good) detection times

Ability to detect all target types

Moderate form factor

Expensive to field and maintain

Moderate power consumption

Potential clutter problems

Visual Obscuration

Chemical

imaging

No issues with clutter of background environment

Low power consumption

Highly effective target detection

Moderate effective range

Reduced field of view

Long detection time

Difficult to ascertain direction


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Week



Concept Generation

Concept Development


CONOPS Development

Inputs

• Selected concept design • Self-assessment techniques • Sample Customer briefing and

marketing brochure

Outputs

• Self-assessment • Customer briefing • Marketing Brochure

Final Deliverables

• Final design briefing

– This is your opportunity to “sell” your concept to your customer

– Walk them through your whole process, present your chosen concept in

detail

• Will require further CAD work and refinement

• Physical models are an option

– The briefing should answer the customers questions, see Appendix

• Brochure

– Develop a fold-out brochure for your customer to take with them

– Example brochures will be provided

• Remember: thorough engineering + solid presentation = SOLD!

Anticipate issues your customer may have - incorporate risk mitigation

factors into your design briefing. See Appendix

A-14

A-15

Summary

• You will use the systems engineering techniques presented to propose

a solution to a significant, real-world problem

– You will use many relevant engineering tools and techniques to facilitate

your creative process

• This briefing provides a kickoff, links, some buried hints, and a

framework for the project

– Refer to it and the other course material frequently

• A few tips:

– Take it one step at a time, focus on what’s currently due

– You will probably start to have concept ideas immediately, write them

down, keep your mind open

Appendix

• The Goal is to determine a way to perform the following:

– Design a system which: • Detects the presence of intruders crossing into your territory. (Options given.)

• Determine how much time is available to react. (Analysis, modeling and simulation.)

• Determine the proper number and type of vehicles to employ. (Design.) – Based on your calculations of the UV kinematic profile required, sensor coverage, battery duration, and effective time on station.

• Determine if the system concept was effective. (Assessment.)

• Develop a marketing brochure which highlights specific features of the design approach using a CAD model of the

system. – Include a statement of system effectiveness in intruder detection and surveillance.

• The system design should use building blocks provided for specific functions such as intruder

detection and surveillance.

– Concentrate on the actual system design. • Hint: Timing and field of view are going to be key parameters so focusing on calculating parameters related to:

– UV motion path

» If the UV maintains a certain path, can it detect intruders and monitor over a wide enough swath or must multiple UV’s be utilized to

close the entire border section.

» If the UV detects an intruder and monitors that intruder successfully, how will the rest of the border be monitored? Is this a possible

technique to negate your systems effectiveness? (i.e., have you thought about decoys? Is this a weakness which can be exploited?)

– Time to go, i.e., how long from detection to border crossing? This timeline will define the system response

requirements that must be met.

– A countermeasure to your system may be as simple as the intruder maneuvering.

» Perhaps calculating the time for the intruder to move from point A to B or to turn versus engagement geometry and time of motion of

the UV needs to be evaluated.

– Remember that border intrusions can be en-mass.

• The system may have to detect and monitor more than one intruder at a time so think about parameters like field of

view, integration onto the UV, motion path, etc.

• This is a large scale application.

– It needs to be somewhat affordable as there may be many vehicles required to protect the border area.

A-1: Additional Info on Approach

A-2: Example Existing UAV Types

Name Range (nautical

miles)

Wing Span (ft) On Station

Endurance (hrs)

Altitude (ft) Max GTO

Weight (Lbm)

Velocity (kts) Payload (Lbm)

Honeywell

MAV (VTOL)

25.0 3.0 (diameter) 0.67 @ 5,500 ft 10,500.0 12.5 50.0 (25.0

ft/sec vertical

ascent

< 2.0

Dragon Eye 5.0 4.0 2.0 1,000.0 4.5 35.0 1.0

AV Pointer 5.0 9.0 1.5 1,000.0 8.0 20.0 – 44.0 2.0

Black Widow 1.0 0.5 0.5 769.0 8.0 17.0 – 35.0 0.02

Silver Fox 210.0 8.0 5.0 1,000.0 0.18 26.0 – 44.0 4.0

Pioneer 100.0 17.0 5.0 15,000.0 447.0 65.0 – 95.0 35.0 – 60.0

Hunter 140.0 29.0 > 11.0 15,000.0 1,200.0 90.0 – 110.0 185.0

Outrider 100.0 11.0 4.9 13,000.0 300.0 35.0 – 110.0 80.0

Predator 400.0 27.0 16.0 25,000.0 2,250.0 70.0 – 120.0 450.0

Global Hawk 13,500.0 116.0 40.0 65,000.0 25,600.0 340.0 2000.0

Dark Star 500.0 69.0 > 8.0 45,000.0 8,600.0 250.0 1,000.0

Color Key: 1. Yellow, small category UAV’s, Black Widow classified as MAV, span ≤ 0.5 ft

2. Blue, medium UAV’s based on range, size, and payload

3. Green, large UAV’s

A-3: Defined Constants

• Border terrain, depicted above, 1 km wide

• Intruder parameters on slide 18, only consider these 4 types.

• Standard day conditions (density, temperature, pressure)

• Assume intruder is stationary at time of initial detection.

– Intruder is then free to move at constant velocity to cross border

– Consider only maximum and minimum velocity when target is in motion.

• Remember to convert dimensions so they are consistent

2.0 km


0.10 km

0.50 km

Water

Mountain

Forest

Desert 0.35 km

• UAV flight parameters are all variable

– Forward velocity

– Flight path

– Altitude

– Ascent / descent predicated upon your UAV concept chosen

• Remember that helicopters (VTOL) can be UAV’s also

• Mix/Qty. of UAV’s can be tailored to your CONOPS

• Quantity and type of sensors carried by the various UAV’s comprising your system

• UGV kinematic parameters are similarly variable.

• Recommend parametrically varying each of these parameters 10% while holding

the others constant in order to assess the effect on your system design.

A-4: Variables

2.0 km


0.10 km

0.50 km

Water

Mountain

Forest

Desert 0.35 km

Trajectory B, Low altitude, terrain following

Trajectory A, high altitude, observation

A-5: Helpful Equations

• The following may prove useful and are basic planar equations of

motion found in your physics text:

Vx = Vx0 + axt

Vy = Vy0 + ayt

X = X0 + Vx0t + ½ axt2

Y = Y0 + VY0t + ½ aYt2

C = (a2 + b2)1/2

= tan-1(a/b)

c a

b

Notes:

• Limit UV acceleration to +2 / -1 g’s

• Consider only planar geometry

• Do not forget to account for gravity in your acceleration term

• Use Euclidian geometry to discretize terrain

• In order to calculate the UV trajectory, the equations (provided in A-5) may

be used in a simple commercial software (such as Excel, MatLab,

MathCad, Fortran, or C) to calculate all necessary geometry and timing

parameters associated with the UV motion.

– Once the basic simulation is running, the equations can be further built up and

more can be added to model any specific surveillance approach to include, for

example:

• Effect of UAV relative height for an airborne system.

• Effect of intruder motion.

• Timing studies to optimize number of UV’s and sensors.

• The basic equations provided can be modified to include the target and can

be run parametrically (automated using user defined rule set) until the

desired UV operational profile and mix of assets is achieved.

A-6: Suggestions to Model Development

A-7: Sample Model Outputs (Continued)

• Consider first a single airborne IR camera sensor

H = 200 meter offset

FOV = 0.14 radians (from sensor table)

V = 50 m/s

• Step 1: Calculate flight path (right) & check against

model

• Step 2: Calculate time of flight for 1 pass using

calculated flight path

Tf = 100.33 km * 1000 m/km *1/50(m/sec) = 2006

sec = 33.4 min

• Step 3: Examine sensor field of view implications for

your planned trajectory:

• Ask yourself, what does this tell me?

– Ex: Spatial gaps during flight due to timing must be filled

through addition of multiple flight vehicles

• Remember, your model must match your hand

calculations

Down range coverage calculation

DR = 2*200*sin(1.0472) = 346 meters

Full azimuthal (cross range) coverage

200 m Azimuth = radians

Elevation = π/3 radians

UAV Flight path

Sensor mounted

Location on UAV

Initial UAV Flight Profile

X

Y

Cro

ss R

ange

(m)

Down Range (m)

Example; Discritization of Border

X

Z

0.0

0.20

0.55 0.70

2.20

8.0 12.0 27.0 75.0 80.0 100.0

Down Range (m)

Alt

itud

e (m

)

UAV Trajectory

S1 S3

S4

S4

S5

S6

Flight Path Calculation

S1 = ((8.0)2 + (2.2 – 0.2)2)1/2 = 8.24 km

S2 = (12.0 – 8.0) = 4.00 km

S4 = (75.0 – 27.0) = 48.00 km

S3 = ((27.0 – 12.0)2 + (2.2 – 0.55)2)1/2 = 15.09 km

S5 = ((80.0-75.0)2 + (0.70 – 0.55)2)1/2 = 5.002 km

S6 = (100.0 – 80.0) = 20.00 km

Total = 100.33 km

• If your code is running correctly, the kinematic path, timing, and sensor coverage vs. time can now be

determined.

– The simulation can also be used to perform trade studies designed to optimize your system design and

response.

• In order to check the code, try calculating the time of flight by setting the altitude to a constant for the UAV

and comparing the X, Y, and time of flight to cover the course. This should match your hand calculations.

– Then set the altitude offset to a constant value and check to see if the results are very similar.

• An additional suggested check of the simulation is to verify that the units of all calculations are consistent

and the results are expressed correctly.

– Use dimensional analysis for this.

• At the conclusion of the modeling and simulation stage of the project, the following questions and

milestones should be met:

– A simple, X-Y plane, parametric model of the UV trajectory enabling physical trade studies to be

performed should be available.

• Given that the detection of the intruder is assured: (i.e., zero false alarm rate.)

– Based on selection of the surveillance sensors, what is the time line for intercept, track, and monitor for

an individual intruder while monitoring the border and allowing the intruder to move once detected?

• Suggestion: use timing chart supplied as a template and fill in using data generated with model.

• Determine if surveillance of the intruder is feasible.

– If so, what is required in terms of system response time.

• i.e., what is the functional time allocation to the various parts of the system design.

• Do you need more than a single type of sensor?

– What type of accuracy is needed and what is the cost impact?

A-8: Tips on Model/Simulation

• In order to design an effective surveillance system, an understanding of

basic functional requirements, for example timing, is required.

– Typical time from detection to border crossing for intruder specified ranges

between ? and ? seconds for the proposed border geometry

– Preliminary allocation of time line based on a threshold value of ? sec and a

goal of ? sec can be used to estimate approach viability / develop functional

requirements.

Function Threshold Goal

Detect & declare intruder --------- ----

Monitor Track --------- ----

Calculate time to cross completion --------- ----

[Assess Next Action] Leave out of timeline, but consider

implications of next actions, e.g. acquire and

track a second intruder.

A-9: Basics of Surveillance System Timeline

• The chart in Appendix A-11 provides data on potential surveillance systems

available to you as the designer.

• Assume that the following functions are performed by any of the system options

given on the chart. The system will:

– Identify and calculate direction of intruder within limits prescribed.

– Issues warning of intruder and sends message to your command post.

– Ideal false alarm rate Pfa = 0.0

– Cost includes integrated electronics to fuse sensor, ID function, and transmitter.

• Rules:

– For RADAR and IR Sensor: better angular accuracy, if required, can be achieved with

addition of more sensors (electronics) at increased cost and volume. Assume 15%

increase in $, 10% increase in weight, & 2x sensors qty for each 1/2 increment in angular

accuracy. Assume no penalty in detection time or track development due to internal

system architecture.

– Use of multiple sensor types is allowed.

– Acoustic sensors do not provide bearing to intruder, only presence in hemisphere defined

by diameter equivalent to maximum detection range.

– Increasing the scanned area by the LIDAR requires the addition of multiple units at a 1/1

cost, weight, and volume penalty for each unit employed.

– UV Sensors provide hemispherical coverage at the elevation angle defined.

A-10: Surveillance System Guidelines

A-11: Sensor Systems Provided by Customer

Sensor Type

Minimum

Effective Range

(m)

Maximum

Effective Range

(m)

Angular

Resolution

(Radians)

Detection Time

(msec)

Form Factor

(cm) Weight (kg)

Power Consumption

(W)

Approx Cost

($)

Acoustic

microphone5 0 25 3.1410 2.5 2x2x5 0.75 1.5 10K

Scanning Short

Range Radar1 25 5,000 0.1758 0.5 20x20x10 15 100 100K

Scanning Mid

Range Radar1 100 20,000 0.1758 0.1 37x37x47 30 350 500K

Scanning Long

Range Radar1 200 200,000 0.1758 0.01 90x90x86 60 700 1,000K

Scanning LIDAR3 15 15,000 0.1756 0.5 25x25x40 10 50 300K

UV Camera2 1 500 0.147 1 28x6x8 2.4 4 10K

Chemical Imaging4 5 3,500 0.15 5 30x20x10 3 2 50K

IR Camera2 10 350 0.79 2 12x5x6 2 2 7K

Notes:

1. Requires 2 antennas to cover 2 azimuth (included in weight). Antenna dimensions 15.24 diameter x 10.16 deep (Not included in size column)

2. Requires 4 apertures to cover 2 azimuth (included in weight). Sensor dimensions 10.16 diameter x 10.16 deep (Not included in size column)

3. Single beam thus requires scanning mirror array or gimbal assembly to cover detection space. (See note 6.) Must have unobstructed view of scanned area.

4. Sensors require aprior information on character of chemical spectrum of image being monitored.

5. Acoustic sensors are very range limited and must be within the maximum effective range to be effective. No directivity possible with single sensor. Requires multiple

microphones in an array to beam form.

6. Angular resolution is constant. Scanned area is 60° x 60° azimuth / elevation for 1 second detection time

7. May be utilized in conjunction with other sensors in order to improve directional sensitivity.

8. Field of view for RADAR with 2 antennas is 180° azimuth x 75° elevation. (Elevation angle can be adjusted through installation angle of antenna.

9. Field of view for IR sensor with 4 apertures is 180° azimuth x 60° elevation. (Elevation angle can be adjusted through installation of aperture.

A-11b: Battery Data Provided by Customer

Hyperlinks to sensor data: http://www.urf.com/madl/eo/viper/ACC02CE1.html

http://www.edocorp.com/RadarAirborne.htm

http://www-v3.thalesgroup.com/airbornesystems/activities/systems/airborne_radars/1_187_207_74.html

http://www.sperrymarine.northropgrumman.com/Products/Radars/anapn242/specifications/

http://www.llnl.gov/sensor_technology/STR40.html

http://www.corocam.com/brochures/K-2227_Corocam_insertv2rev1&3.pdf

http://www.patinc.com/common/documentation/pdfs/Photonics%20East%202003%20Chem_Biol.pdf

http://www.opticsplus.net/home/store/NightVision/Military_LawEnforcement/MINI-14Generation4_Generation3PrimeSelectAlphaMultiPurposeScope

Chemistry Type Wt (g) Operating Temperature

(°C)

Open Circuit

Voltage (V)

Nominal Voltage

(V)

Nominal Capacity

(Ah)

Drain (mA)

Max Continuous

Current (mA)

Max O.D

(mm)

Max Height

(mm)

Li-SOCl2 AA 17.4 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 2.25 1.0 100.0 14.4 49.8

Li-SOCl2 A 21.9 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 3.4 3.0 150.0 17.0 50.9

Li-SOCl2 C 48.0 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 7.7 4.0 150.0 26.0 50.4

Li-SOCl2 D 90.0 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 17.0 1.0 250.0 33.4 61.6

Li-SOCl2 C1

51.0 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 5.5 15.0 1300.0 26.0 50.4

Li-SOCl2 D1 100.0 -60 to +85 3.672

3.6 13.0 15.0 1800.0 33.4 61.6

Li-SO2 ½AA 8.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 450.0 50.0 250.0 14.2 27.9

Li-SO2 AA 15.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 950.0 100.0 1000.0 14.2 50.3

Li-SO2 C 40.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 3750.0 270.0 2500.0 25.9 50.4

Li-SO2 D 85.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 7750.0 250.0 3000.0 34.2 59.3

Li-SO2 F 125.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 11000.0 300.0 3000.0 30.7 99.4

Li-SO2 DD 175.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 16500.0 500.0 3000.0 33.3 120.6

Li-SO2 DD3

300.0 -60 to +70 3.0 2.9 34000.0 1000.0 3000.0 41.7 141.0

Li-MnO2 1/3A 8.0 -40 to +70 3.3 3.0 500 4.5 300.0 16.7 16.6

Li-MnO2 C 60.0 -40 to +70 3.3 3.0 4500.0 500.0 1000.0 25.6 51.0

Li-MnO2 D 116.0 -40 to +70 3.3 3.0 10500.0 1000.0 3000.0 34.0 61.3

Notes:

1. Spiral Cell technology

2. 2 Volt cut off

3. “Long Fat DD”

http://www.urf.com/madl/eo/viper/ACC02CE1.html

http://www.edocorp.com/RadarAirborne.htm




http://www.sperrymarine.northropgrumman.com/Products/Radars/anapn242/specifications/

http://www.llnl.gov/sensor_technology/STR40.html




http://www.patinc.com/common/documentation/pdfs/Photonics East 2003 Chem_Biol.pdf





A-12: Creativity Resources

• Some web resources on creative techniques

– http://www.brainstorming.co.uk/tutorials/tutorialcontents.html

• A comprehensive tutorial on brainstorming and other creative techniques

– http://www.effectivemeetings.com/teams/participation/brainstorming.asp

• A pragmatic summary of how to setup and run a brainstorming session

– http://www.promato.com/brainstorm/bslinks.htm

• A free trial download of a brainstorming and selection facilitation program

“To have a great idea, have

a lot of them.”

— Thomas A. Edison



http://www.effectivemeetings.com/teams/participation/brainstorming.asp

http://www.promato.com/brainstorm/bslinks.htm

A-13: Trade Study Examples

• Trade study examples on the web

– http://www.faa.gov/asd/SystemEngineering/SEM3.0/four_six%20.pdf

• A very detailed look at the systems engineering process and at conducting

trade studies (Starts on line 27)

– http://www.losangeles.af.mil/Tenants/SCEA/CAIV18M/reqtrade40.ppt

• A presentation of a simple CAIV (Cost As an Independent Variable) trade

study, a lot of acronyms, most of the good stuff starts on pg 8

http://www.faa.gov/asd/SystemEngineering/SEM3.0/four_six .pdf

http://www.losangeles.af.mil/Tenants/SCEA/CAIV18M/reqtrade40.ppt

A-14: Key customer questions

• Key Customer questions

– How did you arrive at your timeline and what is it

• Simplifying assumptions you made; why are they valid

– What was your creative process

• Present all of your brainstormed ideas and the context of your brainstorming session

– Why did you select the chosen design

• Present results of trade study

– Provide evidence that the concept is effective

• Which border crossing scenarios can be met successfully

• Which one’s present risk

– Is your solution realizable, affordable, realistic

– Can your surveillance system engage more than one intruder simultaneously

– Are there any safety related effects from your surveillance system design, for example,

LIDAR eye safety?

• Human life, property

• What ethical issues have been considered

– How long from start to develop and field your solution

– Will it work in a range of outdoor environments

• hot, cold, snow, sand, rain, etc.

You will need to perform a critical self-assessment of your offering -

before your customer does. Here are some questions to consider:

• Available technologies.

– What type of technologies can be utilized? need to be utilized?

• Does it exist and how can it be adapted to this problem?

• Enabling technologies requiring further development

– What needs to be invented?

• Is it physically possible?

• Cost prohibitive?

• What is the system configuration?

– Is it compatible with the intended user.

• Size, cost, etc.

• Does the system specified meet the goal of detecting the target?

A-15: Assessing Your Offering

introduction to engineering design - penn state … · • locate intruders crossing into your...

Documents