Top Banner
Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton
23

Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Mar 26, 2015

Download

Documents

Lauren Dunlap
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Magnetic Ordinance Detection

By Christopher Fenton

Page 2: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Goals

• Analyze feasibility of magnetic ordinance detection methods, specifically with IED detection in Iraq in mind

• If feasible, build working prototype

• Successfully detect something metallic

Page 3: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Different Approaches to Object Detection

• Traditional Metal Detectors

• Ground-Penetrating Radar

• Magnetic Detectors

Page 4: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Magnetic Detection Approaches

• Balanced-Loop– Detects change in B-field over time– Covers large areas

• Magnetometers– Measures absolute B-field– Covers small areas

Page 5: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Balanced Loops• First use of Magnetic “Indicator Loops” for

harbor defense in 1915 by British in WWI, adopted by U.S. in 1942 during WWII

• Can only detect moving magnetic disturbances

• Typically large and immobile (>1.6 km^2)

• Abandoned for harbor defense in favor of SONAR following WWII

Page 6: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Balanced Loops in Action

Old detector station in Nahant, MA

Page 7: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Magnetometers

• First invented in 1833 by Carl Gauss

• Can detect magnitude and direction of magnetic field

• Small and lightweight

• Still used for geological surveying and “Magnetic Anomaly Detectors”

Page 8: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Magnetometers in Action

Magnetometer Array used for UXO detection

MicroMag3 3-axis Magnetometer

Circuit model of sensor used in MicroMag3 (Sensor inductance changes with external B-field)

Page 9: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Approach: Magnetometer Array

• Sensors are small (~1”x1”), cheap ($50) and easy to handle – > Even small loops are several m^2

• Insensitive to scanning speed and tilt– > For loops, tilt and speed need to be precisely

monitored

• Arrays can be scaled to arbitrary width for wide-area scanning– > Magnetometers give point measurements, but can

be expanded to cover wide areas like loops do

Page 10: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

The MAGNETube

Page 11: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

MAGNETube Setup

• 3 x MicroMag3 3-axis SPI magnetometers– Sensors mounted 15” apart– Calibrated so Earth’s B-field = 1 = 0.48568G

• 2 x Picaxe 18X microcontrollers– Expandable through “daisy-chaining”

• 1 Laptop running “Listener” software and outputting to CSV file for analysis in Microsoft Excel®

Page 12: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Setup

A B C

Page 13: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

How is the magnitude computed?

1. X, Y, and Z values for all 3 sensors are sent to laptop

2. Calibration offset is subtracted from each direction

3. Magnitude = √(X^2 + Y^2 + Z^2)

4. Magnitude is scaled from 150-200 range to approximately equal “1” in Earth’s B-field

5. Sensor: 1=.48568 Gauss in Los Angeles

Page 14: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 1: 80 lbs of Iron

Location: Erdem’s Apartment

Target: 80 lbs of iron weights in a plastic trashcan

Page 15: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 1: 80lbs of IronPeak Magnitude vs. Distance

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

14 20 26 36

Distance from ground (inches)

Dif

fere

nce f

rom

backg

rou

nd

A

B

C

Conclusion: Readily detectable if directly above pile, drops off quickly

Possibly due to misalignment of sensor during test

Page 16: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 2: 4” Brass Artillery Shell

Page 17: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 2: 4” Brass Artillery Shell

Magnitude vs. Distance*

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25

Ticks

Sca

led

Mag

nit

ud

e

A

B

C

Magnitude vs. Distance

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Magnitude

Dis

tan

ce A

B

C

Test 2: 12” above groundBackground: 12” above ground

Conclusion: Brass has no magnetic signature. Only bolts were detectable, and only then at close range.

Page 18: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 3: Neodymium Magnets (high sensitivity simulation)

Large 3”x6” Neodymium magnet

Page 19: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 3: N.D. Magnet

Peak Magnitude vs. Distance

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

6 12 18 24 30 36

Distance (inches)

Dif

fere

nce

fro

m

Bac

kgro

un

d

A

B

C

Conclusion: Magnet is easily detectable at a reasonable range

Page 20: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 4: Attenuation in Water

Page 21: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Test 4: Submerged N.D. Magnet

Magnitude Vs. Water Depth @ 18"

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

0 5 10 15

Water Depth (inches)

Dif

fere

nce

fro

m

Bac

kgro

un

d

Conclusion: Water has no attenuation effect on magnetic field

Page 22: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Future Improvements

• Use faster microcontroller with on-board FPU (~3X improvement in sampling rate)

• Add wireless serial link for easier calibration and field-use

• Experiment with distortion detection vs. simple magnitude detection

• Use higher-sensitivity magnetometers and higher-density array

• Compare vs. traditional metal detector

Page 23: Magnetic Ordinance Detection By Christopher Fenton.

Conclusion

• Undocumented hardware failure-modes can be extremely difficult to fix

• Magnetic detection appears to be a valid method (and is apparently in-use)

• A simple array can be constructed for less than $250

• With more time, the current design could be greatly improved