hc US Dcpartment of

Defense (DoD) has funded a

dazzling array of high tech
solutions for military prob-
lems. While typically effective for
long range mass destruction, these
solutions generally are not useful in
combatting civilian crime. Our goal
is to convert high tech Doll) capa-
bilities into cost effective tools that
help law enforcement agencies.
For example, a new sensor has
been designed based on technology
developed for missile warhead fusing.
This small, light weight, low power
radar exploits the fact that opti-
mized radio waves can penetrate non-
metallic materials. This new
surveillance capability can help pro-
vide information about what is in a
wall, ceiling, floor, on the other side
of a door or even a concrete wall.
generally line-of-sight (LOS) devices.
They must have a clear visual view of
the surveillance area. This obviously
places a major limitation on police
field operations. It is often difficult to
set up this type of surveillance without
being detected.
Whats more, visual surveillance,
even with a TV, can be tedious and
hstraling. A person watching a TV
screen showing an area where nothing
is going on soon loses interest. As a
result, other distractions or drowsi-
ness can cause important activities to
be missed. A signal, such as a tone or
flashing light, that operates only when
there is activity would help.
The Motion Detection Radar
(MDR) adds a new dimension to sur-
veillance. MDR can be effective even
through wooden doors and concrete
walls, It requires very little setup and
P-; Remote
Monitor 4 I
I Body Dielectric
Concrete Constant - 80
Wall Dielectric
Constant - 8 -12
. The Human Body Contains -65% Water . Water Has A High Dielectric Constant
- Walls Have A Low Dielectric Constant
~
Fig. 1 Wd / s are opaque, the body i s a good reflector.
Law enforcement agency surveil-
lance typically incl udea; television
(TV) cameras, infra-red (IR) sensors
and hidden microphones, often with
remote transmitters. These sensors
have greatly enhanced the surveillance
capabilities of the law enforcement
agencies. However, these sensors are
does not have any extemd wires con-
nected to it. Unlike TV cameras and
IR sensors that must be concealed, the
MDR can be placed in a safe loca-
hidden in a container with non-metal-
lic walls. The MDR provides an
effective and timely alert even if the
tion on the other side of a wall or
person doing the surveillance is pre-
occupied, distracted or inadvertently
nods off due to fatigue.
The basic premise is that radio
waves will penetrate most non-metal-
lic materials. However, a number of
factors must be considered to properly
exploit this phmorriena. The cornpo-
sition and thickness of the material to
be penetrated is a prime factor in the
initial design. Likewise, the reflectivi-
ty and uniqueness of the actual targets
on the other side of the wall must also
be considered. Radio waves both pen-
etrate and reflect off of surfaces of a
non-metallic material. The surface
roughness, dielectric constant and
angle of incidence all affect the pene-
tration characteristics.
In Fig. 1, the radar waves are pene-
trating a dry concrete wall with a
dielectric constant between 8 and 12.
The primary target on the other side
of the wall is a moving person.
Because the human body has a high
concentration of water, which has a
dielectric constant of 80 (distilled),
the expected reflectivity is quite rea-
sonable compared to other objects in
view. While other metallic objects
have greater reflectance, the radars
ability to scnse motion makes the
moving target unique and relatively
easy to detect in this highly cluttered
environment.
The effects of velocity change,
ubsorption, refraction and reflection
all must be considered as shown in
Fig. 2. The radio waves velocity is
slowed by the square root of the
dielectric constant of the non-metallic
materials (Fig. 2a). A material with a
dielectric constant of 4 would
decrease the velocity of the radio
wave by a factor of 2. Thus. the
dielectric constant and the thickness
of the material determine how much
the apparent range to the target is
DECEMBER 97IJ ANUARY 98 0278-6648/97/$10.00 0 1997 IEEE 23
Transmission Speed
Non-Metallic Material Slows Waves
(4
Absorption
The Wall Absorbs
(c)
Refraction Loss
Lar e Particles Cause The
Rajar Beam To Break Up
Refraction
Waves Bend Through Dielectrics
(b)
Reflection
The Wall Reflects
(4
Diffraction
t
Waves Diffract Around Edges
Fig. 2 Considerations when RF i s penetrating non-metallic maferials.
Fig. 3 Measured one way loss: 4- 140 GHz
modified each time the signal goes
through the material. For most thin
materials, this delay is insignificant;
but, for others, it can make a consider-
able difference.
The absorption of the radio energy,
while passing through the material, is
affected by the materials physical make
up (Fig. 2c). If sufficiently large, con-
ductive, dissipative particles (such as
carbon) are in the material, then
depending upon the signal frequency,
ohmic attenuation may cause sufficient
loss to make the system unusable. If the
dielectric particle size of the structures
material is large with respect to the sig-
nals wavelength, there will be intemal
reflections and refraction. These will
distort the signal wave front and cause
excessive attenuation (Fig. 2e). For
example, concrete with large internal
stone aggregate will have far greater
loss at 10 GHz than the same thickness
of concrete made with fine sand.
The refraction of the wave passing
through the material (Fig. 2b) is also a
function of the dielectric constant and
thickness. The effect of refraction is
small for homogeneous materials with
particle sizes much smaller than one
quarter wavelength. For construction
concrete, the effect can be significant at
higher frequencies. The radar designer
must consider the loss through the mate-
rial (which should be small) compared
to the normal two way radar range loss
(one over range to thefourth power).
Diffraction (Fig. 2f) is caused by
radio waves striking an objects edge
and producing a scattering of the radio
waves. This effect is predominant when
metal objects are inside the wall the
radar beam is penetrating.
The refection of the radio wave is
also influenced by the angle of incidence
between the wave and the wall, as well
as the distance between the radar anten-
na and the wall (Fig. 2d). When the
antenna is pointed directly at the wall,
the maximum direct return from the wall
is received back at the radar. When the
antenna beam is pointed at an angle to
the wall, the reflection from the wall
back to the radar rapidly decreases.
Reflections off walls that go back to
objects on the radars side of the wall
can become quite strong. All large flat
surfaces act as mirrors to the radar sig-
nal. The consequences of this charac-
teristic are difficult to predict. This can
lead to significant angle errors in
assessing the location of the moving
person at certain frequencies with cer-
tain types of walls. The effect is also
modified by the texture of the walls
surface: the smoother the wall, the
greater the effective reflection and the
smaller the penetration. A potential
radar system limitation is the ratio of
the power received off the close wall
relative to the power received off a dis-
tant moving target.
The loss of radio frequency energy
as the beam passes through materials
varies greatly with different conditions.
These conditions include: age, chemical
as well as mechanical construction, and
the amount of metallic contaminates.
24 IEEE POTENTIAL
Figure 3 shows a comparison of the
measured m e way losses versus fre-
quency for various common wall and
building materials. The concrete blocks
were standard 6 inches thick by 6 inches
high by 12 inches long blocks with two
holes in the middle. This left about 1
and 1/2 inches of concrete on each side
of the holes. A number of these blocks
were stacked to prevent direct energy
radiation around the wall. The same
setup was used for the boards and other
materials measured. There was no
attempt to maintain uniform thickness
for these tests; however, the distance
between the antennas was constant.
The concrete blocks presented the
greatest loss of the materials tested. The
initial tests concentrated on the effects
at the higher frequencies. While there is
a temptation to directly convert lhe one
way loss to two way losses, this may
lead to erroneous results. While the loss
alone may be translatable, the angle of
incidence and the distance from the tar-
get to the wall can have a greater effect
than just the one way loss factor. Com-
mon window glass, for example, can
cause large signal losses at certain offset
angles. As stated previously, this is not
necessarily predictable, but must be con-
sidered in the system design and setup.
To determine the possibilities for
practical radar operation through con-
crete, tests were conducted at the lower
frequencies, Figure 4a shows the one
way loss measurements through com-
mon 8 inch, pre-stressed, reinforced
concrete walls for both horizontal (H)
and vertical (V) antenna orientations.
The typical one way loss of only 2 to 4
dB at 900 MHz was quite acceptable for
radar penetration.
Figure 4b shows the one way H-H
loss measurements through a three foot
thick reinforced concrete wall in the fre-
quency range of 500 MHz to 2500
MHz. At 900 MHz, the loss increased to
6 to 8 dB, which was still quite accept-
able. A number of different measure-
ments at different locations along the
wall were taken, while keeping the
transmit and receive antennas of the bi-
static radar at a constant 12 inch dis-
tance from the wall. The losses were
quite consistent when the antennas were
both placed horizontally.
Figure 4c shows the variation in
attenuation when the antennas were
placed vertically. Some of the variation
in the data was caused by the vertical
steel reinforcing bars mounted every 12
inches in the concrete. The distance of
the receive antenna from the wall also
caused wide variations in the one way
received energy levels. This also may
have been caused by the reinforcing
steel, or by the interference of reflec-
tions between the wall and the antenna.
ix
The Motion Detection Radar, shown
in Fig. 5 (pg. 26), is contained in a high
impact carrying case. The antenna is a
flat plate 13 inches x 13 inches (33 cm x
33 cm) located in the lid of the case.
The antenna radiates a +/- 45 degree
conical beam out of the case's right
side. The transmitter and receiver mod-
ules are mounted on the antenna. They
also fit into the lid of the carrying case.
The control unit is visible in the left side
oi the case. Two high current recharge-
able NI-CAD (nickel-cadmium) batter-
ies are located under the foam
partitions.
The VHF radio transmitter is mount-
ed in the left front of the case (not visi-
ble). I t can be removed for remote
operation or it can be replaced by the
audio amplifier shown below the case.
The two remote VHF radio receivers
are used to receive the target detection
tones that are generated by the radar.
The receivers can pick up the tones up
to a mile from the radar. The three bat-
tery chargers are shown just below the
receivers, A 50 foot extension cable
allows the antenna, and transmitter and
receiver units to be remote up to that
distance from the carrying case.
The highly sensitive continuous
wave (CW) phase detection radar has
been approved by the Federal Commu-
nications Commission (FCC) for opera-
tion in the 902 to 928 MHz frequency
band. There are restrictions imposed by
the FCC which limit the power radiated
from the antenna and signal harmonic
content of any commercially sold prod-
uct using this frequency band. While
this is not necessarily the best frequency
for material penetration, it is a reason-
able compromise. This i q hecauqe it can
be sold and used commercially, and has
proven to be effective.
A block diagram of the system is
shown in Fig. 6. There are two different
W-kl & V-V Qne Way Loss Through 8" Concrete Wall (a)
H4-I bne Way Loss Through 3' Concrete (b}
I I I I
V-v one W& toss TfIrough 3 Concrete (c)
%Lo 700 so0 400 400 liao ,;Do 400 2100 A00 *&lo
Freauencv MHz " =Receive Antenna from W
Fig. 4 One way loss through 8 inch and 36 inch reinforced concrete
DECEMBER '97IJ ANUARY '98 25
Fig. 5 The highly porfable MDR
antenna types used with this system.
One is a high gain directional anten-
na with approximately 9 dB gain. It
produces a cone shaped pattern that is
+/- 45 degrees wide at the -3 dB point.
This antenna radiates from the right
edge of the thin, 13 inch (33 cm) square
antenna. It has a front to back ratio of
better than 10:1.
The optional antenna is a very broad
beam omni-directional antenna. The
omni-antenna is round, 114inches (.63
cm>in diameter, 18 inches (45.75 cm)
long and has a gain of one. The omni-
antenna provides large volume cover-
age in an enclosed region, such as a
room. Although i t provides much
shorter range coverage than the high
gain antenna, it is aspect independent.
It can be placed into a small hole or
dropped into an isolated location to
observe motion.
A transmitter and receiver (TR) unit
is mounted on each antenna. A small
cable for power and signal is connected
from the radar control unit to the TR
unit. The length of this cable can be
extended to 100 feet (30.5 meters) or
more for remote antenna operation, or
when it is used in throw phones.
(These are ruggedized telephones that
can be thrown through a window or
door to encourage communications with
an uncooperative occupant.)
The signal processor restricts the
sensitivity of the radar to motions
between 0.2 feet per second to 5 feet per
second. This covers the range of motion
that could be expected from a human
being under most conditions.
There are two outputs from the radar.
The first is a relay closure which acti-
vates anytime there is motion detected
above the adjustable threshold setting.
The second is an audio tone which
varies in pitch in proportion to the rate
of motion being detected. The pilot tone
is 60 Hz when there is no motion. The
tone rises to approximately 300 Hz
when motion is detected. The tone will
fluctuate in pitch with the motion. This
gives a relative indication of the distance
to the radar and the persons speed.
A hand-held portable, commercial
band (VHF) radio is controlled by the
MDR relay. When motion is detected,
the radio transmitter is keyed. The
MDR audio tone is applied to the mike
jack of the radio. One or more similar
portable radio receivers are used to
pickup the transmitted signal at ranges
of up to one mile from the MDR.
The development of the NLDR system
has been completely an in-house com-
mercial activity. Other hardware using
similar technology has been developed
for several US government organiza-
tions to meet their unique needs.
A number of three dimensional
imaging radars have been delivered to
the US government. These can produce
a three dimensional (3D) image of a
person or object in the field of view
with better than 2 inch three dimension-
al image resolution. The very portable
3D system has been used in a number of
field operations while operating with
portable power.
A modification of the 3D imaging
radar is the two dimensional (2D) sys-
tem. This system can provide range and
angle to targets through concrete walls
with better than 6 inch range resolution.
The 2D system uses the same signal
processors and display as the 3D system.
It can be installed on the 3D system in a
few minutes. Because of the frequencies
and bandwidths required for these more
sophisticated systems, it is not possible
to obtain FCC approval for commercial
applications under the present regula-
tions However, the US government is
m&ng them available to local enforce-
ment agencies with prior approval.
Applications for ground penetration
are being tested and evaluated The key
limitation has been the non-unique
nature of buried materials and the fact
they are not moving It is difficult to tell
the difference between a mine and a
dead tree limb, or pop-bottle, just below
the surface Both can be detected by
radar, but there are not enough unique
features to clearly identify the objects.
We have been researching techniques
that will greatly enhance both the range
and the angle accuracies. The goal is to
obtain enough resolution to automati-
cally extract salient unique features of
objects below the ground.
Frazier, L. M., Surveillance Through
Walls and Other Opaque Materials,
presented at the IEEE 1996 National
Radar Conference, Ann Arbor Michi-
gan, 13-16 May 1996.
Mr Frazier has been with Hughes/
General Dynamics for 40 years His
experience includes design and field
testing of many different types of radar
and signal processing systems. This
includes both pulsed and continuous
wave radar systems for mono-static
and bi-static radar applications. Over
the past six years, he has developed a
field portable, high resolution three-
dimensional imaging radar which pro-
vides isometric images of RF reflective
targets. He has developed the hand
held, motion detection, concrete pene-
trating radar that fits in a briefcase. He
is presently working on new concepts
for ground and wall penetration and
mapping radars.
Fig. 6 Motion detection radar block diagram
26 IEEE POTENTIALS