22.01.2015 Views

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

(IVAR) - Final Report - Strategic Environmental Research and ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

6.5 DATA FUSION<br />

6.5.1 Quantitative Performance Criteria<br />

6.5.1.1 Spatial Alignment for Fusion between Two Radars [SD3.1]<br />

Objective<br />

Fusion is the process of combining tracks generated by independent radars with overlapping<br />

coverage into common tracks. We designed Performance Criterion SD3.1, Spatial Alignment for<br />

Fusion Between Two Radars, to demonstrate that two asynchronous radars can be spatially<br />

aligned within acceptable error to provide meaningful target data for fusion.<br />

The association process of data fusion looks at how well a pair of tracks, suspected to be from<br />

the same target, match. Fusing target tracks from two independent radars with overlapping<br />

coverage requires alignment in two spatial dimensions (range <strong>and</strong> azimuth), <strong>and</strong> one temporal<br />

dimension. The combined misalignment in these three dimensions for a pair of tracks must be<br />

relatively small in order to successfully associate the separate tracks with the same target.<br />

Several <strong>IVAR</strong> study locations have two operating radars with overlapping coverage, including:<br />

SEA, NASWI, <strong>and</strong> MCASCP. We reviewed recorded tracks from these three pairs of radars in<br />

order to identify periods of time when they were tracking the same targets. Our goal was to<br />

identify commonly tracked targets (at least one for each radar pair) in order to compute the<br />

spatial misalignment errors for each.<br />

In order to successfully demonstrate Performance Criterion SD3.1, the misalignment error for<br />

each pair of radar tracks must be less than three times the a priori spatial uncertainty (Appendix<br />

B defines how the a priori spatial uncertainty is computed).<br />

Methods<br />

We selected SEA, NASWI, <strong>and</strong> MCASCP as the <strong>IVAR</strong> locations to be used in this<br />

demonstration. From this set of three we chose the following radar pairs with overlapping<br />

coverage:<br />

• The SEAAR1m <strong>and</strong> SEAAR2u at SEA.<br />

• The eBirdRad (or WIeBirdRad) <strong>and</strong> WIAR1 at NASWI.<br />

• The MCASCP eBirdRad <strong>and</strong> a second eBirdRad unit that were both used in an exercise<br />

north of MCASCP.<br />

We reviewed the target data from each site <strong>and</strong> selected three datasets. The location <strong>and</strong> time<br />

period of each dataset are summarized in Table 6-33.<br />

Table 6-33. Tracking events selected for demonstration of spatial alignment.<br />

Location<br />

NASWI<br />

SEA<br />

MCASP<br />

Time Period<br />

Nov 13 2009, 01:54 – 02:10 GMT<br />

Oct 6 2009, 21:15 – 21:37 GMT<br />

Feb 14 2006, 20:03 – 20:15 GMT<br />

232

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!