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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

few gulls, the radar did not provide us this information on the DRP display. Even if all three radar displays were being monitored simultaneously, it’s extremely important to understand the premise under which we were conducting the survey: the ability of avian radars to detect and track birds is a function of where the bird is in relation to the energy of the radar beam at that time. Given the antennas have a fixed coverage volume, many of these birds may have been outside the zone of detection. We were not able to check either of the AR2 radars to determine if they were detecting the birds we were watching. Utility of Technology in Airport Operations 5. Please rate the following where 1=poor, 2=fair, 3=good, 4=very good, and 5= excellent. The assigned numerical ratings were for the DRP unless specified otherwise: Ease of Implementation 4 Ease of Use 3 Timeliness 3 General Utility 3 Demonstrated validity of display 4 Reliability 4 Please provide specific comments to support or expand your rating. Ease of Implementation - An important component of implementing a remote radar display was working with the Port’s Informational Technology department to acquire permissions to install and use VPN and VNC software to remotely access the airports internal computer network and the AR1 host computer operating in the midfield trailer. Except for the USB wireless device becoming dysfunctional itself, once a connection was established there were no serious hardware or software issues the prevented us from maintaining communication to the AR1 remotely. Future laptops used for displaying targets remotely might consider the use of an internal rather than an external USB wireless device to better protect this hardware from damage when being used an environment where the PC may be moved frequently. Ease of Use – Both the remote DRP and GEC displays were used and compared. While the GEC was specifically designed for a high level of user satisfaction, the purpose of the DRP software was for system monitoring and maintenance. Nonetheless, most of our time was spent using the DRP display because of its current capabilities of presenting the plots and tracks with up to 120 of the previous detections commingled in one display. Timeliness – To determine display latency, multiple trails were conducted with both the remote DRP and the GEC displays (Table E-1). Results consistently indicated a more rapid update rate and response times for the DRP than the GEC that was tasked with first processing DRP data from all three radars before being displayed. For the fly passing trials, the latency from when the vehicle passed a given point on the airfield to when it actually passed the displayed point was equivalent to the update rate (screen refresh rate). 350
Table E-1. Remote radar display latency (seconds) by computer application. The same airport operation’s vehicle was used as a dynamic target for tracking and the observation platform equipped with a PC laptop, the hardware supporting the remote display. A connection to the Port of Seattle’s computer network was made using an external wireless USB device. Application Refresh Rate (s) Display Latency (s)* Google Earth Client (GEC) 5 17-22 Digital Radar Processor (DRP) 2.5 8-10 *Amount of time that passed before the display showed a new moving target as a track or dropped an existing track from that had ended. Vehicle (target) speed was ranged from stationary to 10 m/s, the low end of a typical birds flight speed. Higher latency periods with both applications were noted to detect a target that had recently become active or inactive, such as birds taking off or for birds that had just landed, respectively, than for a vehicle’s position to be correctly determined as it passed a predetermined geographic point on the airfield at a constant rate of speed (10 m/s). The reason for this was evident when watching the DRP display. The plots would first appear in 3 to 5 seconds after becoming mobile and then the confirmed tracks would be displayed beginning several seconds later. General Utility - The extent to which our wildlife control activities truly benefitted from the manual use of the real-time remote display rather than automated hazard alert system was a topic of discussion during these trials. Having an extra person in the vehicle using the remote display almost continually was an atypical situation but one that was vital in gaining a better understanding of the strengths and limitations of using this technology for conducting daily wildlife control activities. Certainly, the greatest benefit from this technology to date was using the archived data to highlight bird activity in terms of temporal and geographic trends. For example, we are now able to quantify the changed in the number of targets are detected before and after sunrise and sundown. Fewer suspected bird targets were observed during darkness immediately preceding or following a period of daylight. This pattern of activity is confirmed by our knowledge of the airport environment where birds, especially starlings and American crows (crows) that reach peak numbers on and near the airport at dawn and dusk as they depart from and gather to their night roosts. Target number was not assessed during periods of total darkness because of human limitations to observe birds then. Demonstrated Validity of Display – Both displays used the same radar data initially processed by the DRP software and provided credible information when understood that objects other than birds were also being readily tracked. Rather than having the DRP software mask out the runways and taxiway where human-related ground movement activity typically occurred, we instead cognitively parsed out this superfluous information and focus our attention in the other areas where we would only expect bird targets to be. An added advantage of watching a tracked vehicle is it gave geographic perspective to a highflying bird that was also being tracked. Reliability – The ease of using the radar system during the 7 sessions could only be rated 351
Page 1 and 2:
FINAL REPORT Integration and Valida
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents List of Tables ..
Page 5 and 6:
APPENDIX A. POINTS OF CONTACT .....
Page 7 and 8:
Table 6-17. Altitudinal distributio
Page 9 and 10:
List of Figures Figure 2-1. Chronol
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 6-17. Plot of the northing c
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 6-42. eBirdRad display based
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 6-82. Hourly track count ove
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 6-115: COP display showing f
Page 19 and 20:
List of Acronyms Acronym AGL AIP AR
Page 21 and 22:
Acronym RST RT SEA SQL SSC Pacific
Page 23 and 24:
Carmen Lombardo Naval Air Station,
Page 25 and 26:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Military bases an
Page 27 and 28:
database and redistributed to other
Page 29 and 30:
1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND Encro
Page 31 and 32:
A seventh objective, the Functional
Page 33 and 34:
Table 1-1 (cont.). IVAR TASK/ OBJEC
Page 35 and 36:
environmental stewardship with miss
Page 37 and 38:
2 TECHNOLOGY/METHODOLOGY DESCRIPTIO
Page 39 and 40:
The original BirdRad system was des
Page 41 and 42:
2.4 TECHNOLOGY/METHODOLOGY DEVELOPM
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 2-2. Configuration of BirdRa
Page 45 and 46:
2.4.3 eBirdRad - Digital Radars wit
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 2-5. Interior view of the eB
Page 49 and 50:
accuracy and target continuity over
Page 51 and 52:
permanently installed at SEA. Prior
Page 53 and 54:
2.5 ADVANTAGES AND LIMITATIONS OF T
Page 55 and 56:
3 PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES Table 3-1
Page 57 and 58:
Table 3-1 (cont.). Performance Obje
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
For the third test, Validation Usin
Page 67 and 68:
temporal domain by recording all bi
Page 69 and 70:
3.1.2.2.7 Provides Bird Abundance o
Page 71 and 72:
difference in the time (i.e., the l
Page 73 and 74:
3.1.6.2.4 Maintenance [SE4.2] We es
Page 75 and 76:
Table 4-1. Summary of the IVAR stud
Page 77 and 78:
4.1 MCAS CHERRY POINT Marine Corps
Page 79 and 80:
2006 the primary eBirdRad unit from
Page 81 and 82:
(directional WiFi) to the Internet.
Page 83 and 84:
• Large (several thousand) flocks
Page 85 and 86:
location for demonstrating the capa
Page 87 and 88:
5.1 CONCEPTUAL TEST DESIGN 5 TEST D
Page 89 and 90:
5.3 DESIGN AND LAYOUT OF TECHNOLOGY
Page 91 and 92:
Assuming these lines evidence confi
Page 93 and 94:
that dataset [Section 6.5.1.3]. 5.5
Page 95 and 96:
6 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT The Perfor
Page 97 and 98:
ecord the time, Track ID, and other
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 6-1. Percentage of targets c
Page 101 and 102:
Comparing the performance of dish v
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 6-4. The basic sensor elemen
Page 105 and 106:
Figure 6-6. The polygon around the
Page 107 and 108:
Figure 6-8. Diagram of sampling “
Page 109 and 110:
• It takes several scans (nominal
Page 111 and 112:
Session Correla tions 600 500 y = 1
Page 113 and 114:
To evaluate the capabilities of the
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 6-15. Runway 3 at SEA, showi
Page 117 and 118:
comparisons between the RCH-GPS dat
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 6-18. Plot of the northing c
Page 121 and 122:
Figure 6-20. Plot of the easting co
Page 123 and 124:
Conclusion In the quantitative perf
Page 125 and 126:
Table 6-8. Column headings of the T
Page 127 and 128:
Table 6-9 demonstrates quantitative
Page 129 and 130:
Table 6-10. The parameters of targe
Page 131 and 132:
Table 6-11. The position of Visual
Page 133 and 134:
Table 6-12. Solitary targets at MCA
Page 135 and 136:
Figure 6-23. The track of target T2
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
intended to demonstrate these syste
Page 147 and 148:
Figure 6-34. Screen capture of bird
Page 149 and 150:
6.1.2 Qualitative Performance Crite
Page 151 and 152:
upper right have completely converg
Page 153 and 154:
Figure 6-38. The progression of the
Page 155 and 156:
The slight difference in alignment
Page 157 and 158:
Figure 6-42. eBirdRad display based
Page 159 and 160:
Figure 6-44. A partial history of t
Page 161 and 162:
6.2 SAMPLING PROTOCOL 6.2.1 Quantit
Page 163 and 164:
Figure 6-46. Image from the track h
Page 165 and 166:
Table 6-14. Dates, times and names
Page 167 and 168:
Figure 6-48. Fifteen-minute (06:04-
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 6-50. Fifteen-minute (02:24-
Page 171 and 172:
We used a TVW to process the plots
Page 173 and 174:
Figure 6-53. In an example of night
Page 175 and 176:
6.2.1.4 Efficiently Stores Bird Tra
Page 177 and 178:
Figure 6-56 shows sites 13-24 in th
Page 179 and 180:
We extracted the radar data for thi
Page 181 and 182:
Figure 6-57. Digital image of the d
Page 183 and 184:
Table 6-17. Altitudinal distributio
Page 185 and 186:
hours apart, showed considerable va
Page 187 and 188:
• The sampling event time period
Page 189 and 190:
underwent a 4-minute initialization
Page 191 and 192:
Figure 6-62. DRP Live application l
Page 193 and 194:
commands we issued to the radar; th
Page 195 and 196:
4. Range Decrease (x7) 5. Range Inc
Page 197 and 198:
Figure 6-65, Figure 6-66, and Figur
Page 199 and 200:
6.2.2.4 Provides Spatial Distributi
Page 201 and 202:
Figure 6-69. A plot of all track ac
Page 203 and 204:
Figure 6-71. Twelve 2-hour historie
Page 205 and 206:
Figure 6-72. TVW application displa
Page 207 and 208:
Conclusion Figure 6-74. Oblique vie
Page 209 and 210:
Archived Data to a GIS We used the
Page 211 and 212:
(SQL). Extracting target data from
Page 213 and 214:
Figure 6-78. Daily, unfiltered, tra
Page 215 and 216:
Figure 6-79. Time periods selected
Page 217 and 218:
Figure 6-82. Hourly track count ove
Page 219 and 220:
esults are displayed in Figure 6-83
Page 221 and 222:
As can be seen in Figure 6-83, the
Page 223 and 224:
Figure 6-84 clearly demonstrates th
Page 225 and 226:
Conclusion We have successfully dem
Page 227 and 228:
LAN within a facility to the operat
Page 229 and 230:
All reference times were recorded i
Page 231 and 232:
Description of Remote Display - As
Page 233 and 234:
mounted laptop computer (Figure 6-8
Page 235 and 236:
very good because the system was sa
Page 237 and 238:
operations personnel or their contr
Page 239 and 240:
Figure 6-90. Alarm status pane and
Page 241 and 242:
Figure 6-92. Alarm triggered as a f
Page 243 and 244:
Figure 6-95. Screen capture of the
Page 245 and 246:
Figure 6-96. An example from a data
Page 247 and 248:
Table 6-29. Differences found betwe
Page 249 and 250:
6.4 DATA INTEGRATION 6.4.1 Quantita
Page 251 and 252:
Figure 6-100. Screen captures for S
Page 253 and 254:
We used a screen-capture program at
Page 255 and 256:
Results Table 6-32 records the time
Page 257 and 258:
We acquired the appropriate plots a
Page 259 and 260:
Figure 6-105. Track histories of ta
Page 261 and 262:
synchronized, both spatially and te
Page 263 and 264:
0.004687 seconds ahead of the NTP t
Page 265 and 266:
Figure 6-108: COP display showing f
Page 267 and 268:
Figure 6-110: TVW display showing t
Page 269 and 270:
The next example from NASWI involve
Page 271 and 272:
Figure 6-114: TVW display showing t
Page 273 and 274:
Figure 6-116: COP display showing a
Page 275 and 276:
Fusion processing was enabled in th
Page 277 and 278:
processing associated with this dat
Page 279 and 280:
Figure 6-122: Track IDs shown for b
Page 281 and 282:
Conclusion We successfully demonstr
Page 283 and 284:
Of course, many other factors contr
Page 285 and 286:
one, Jim Swift, had been exposed to
Page 287 and 288:
Methods The US military 27 designat
Page 289 and 290:
Natural R.esoan:es Br.mch 22541Jolm
Page 291 and 292:
Given these considerations, the IVA
Page 293 and 294:
Results No maintenance was required
Page 295 and 296:
acquired and is testing JRC S-band
Page 297 and 298:
areas of overlap. Data fusion algor
Page 299 and 300:
6.8 FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND PER
Page 301 and 302:
Table 7-1. Cost Model for a Standal
Page 303 and 304:
additional processors account of th
Page 305 and 306:
Installation Site Assessment - Rada
Page 307 and 308:
e incurred, depending on what infor
Page 309 and 310:
eal time, avian radars and can dete
Page 311 and 312:
Network Connectivity. The US Depart
Page 313 and 314:
Airport Improvement Program (AIP) f
Page 315 and 316:
9 REFERENCES Anderson, C., and S. O
Page 317 and 318:
APPENDIX A. POINTS OF CONTACT POINT
Page 319 and 320:
POINT OF CONTACT Name Ryan King Mat
Page 321 and 322:
APPENDIX B. ANALYTICAL METHODS SUPP
Page 323 and 324: METHOD #2: VALIDATION BY IMAGE COMP
Page 325 and 326: The pattern of yellows and blues in
Page 327 and 328: Radar Team (RT) Site Selection Sinc
Page 329 and 330: will measured the magnetic bearing
Page 331 and 332: Figure B-6. Using a GPS to record s
Page 333 and 334: • Visual Observer - observes bird
Page 335 and 336: Figure B-9. Flowchart of target con
Page 337 and 338: VT: “Radar, Team 2-Alpha copies T
Page 339 and 340: eam and the VTs have difficulty loc
Page 341 and 342: why it was changed, who made the ch
Page 343 and 344: METHOD #4: CONFIRMATION OF BIRD TAR
Page 345 and 346: Figure B-12. Duplexed image showing
Page 347 and 348: Table B-2. Dates, times, and antenn
Page 349 and 350: For the analysis of the simultaneou
Page 351 and 352: Table B-3. Altitude of the radar be
Page 353 and 354: Figure B-17. Diagram of sampling
Page 355 and 356: METHOD #6: DEMONSTRATING REAL-TIME
Page 357 and 358: APPENDIX C. DATA QUALITY ASSURANCE/
Page 359 and 360: APPENDIX D. SUPPORTING DATA D.1 Par
Page 361 and 362: Table D-1 (cont.). Date Track ID Up
Page 367 and 368: D.2 Listing of One-Hour Track Histo
Page 369 and 370: Table D-2 (cont.). 07:00-08:00 WI_A
Page 371 and 372: APPENDIX E. SURVEY OF AIRPORT PERSO
Page 373: used as the real-time target becaus
Page 377: 7. Please rate the following where
show all

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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?