The present invention relates in a first aspect to a method and apparatus for providing an indication of the direction of a target, and in a second aspect to a method and apparatus for estimating the direction of arrival of an acoustic pulse. Both aspects may be employed typically, although not exclusively, in a system for identifying the direction and/or range of a sniper and/or determining the trajectory of a bullet fired by the sniper.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,178,141 describes a system for determining the trajectory of a supersonic bullet by observing the shock wave from the bullet. Muzzle blast observations may also be used to estimate the exact sniper location along the trajectory. The sensors are helmet-mounted, and each helmet is supported by wireless communications, GPS and a backpack or otherwise mounted computer system that computes and displays the solutions.
A first aspect of the invention provides a method of providing an indication of the direction of a target, the method comprising the steps of detecting a signal originating from the target; processing the signal to estimate the direction of the target relative to a weapon; and providing an indication when the weapon is aligned with the estimated direction of the target.
The first aspect of the invention also provides apparatus for providing an indication of the direction of a target, the apparatus comprising a sensor for detecting a signal originating from the target; a processor for processing the signal to estimate the direction of the target relative to a weapon; and a direction indicator for providing an indication when the weapon is aligned with the estimated direction of the target.
The first aspect of the invention presents a new method and apparatus for presenting target direction information to a user. By providing a user with an indication when a weapon (typically held or controlled by the user) is aligned with the estimated direction of a target such as a sniper, the user can quickly and accurately return fire.
Preferably the apparatus comprises an orientation sensor for providing an output indicative of the direction of the weapon, and the direction indicator provides an indication when the output from the orientation sensor indicates that the weapon is aligned with the estimated direction of the target.
The signal originating from the target may be a visual signal (such as a visual muzzle flash) but most preferably the signal is an acoustic signal such as a muzzle blast or projectile shock wave.
The signal may be detected by helmet-mounted sensors as in U.S. Pat. No. 6,178,141. However in some situations it may be preferable for the user to be operating in a “helmets off” environment. Also, if the sensors are helmet-mounted then a complex system must be provided to estimate the target direction relative to the weapon. Therefore preferably the signal is detected by one or more sensors mounted on the weapon.
Preferably the indication is also provided by an indicator mounted on the weapon.
Preferably the sensor, indicator and processor are mounted in a common housing.
In a preferred embodiment an indication is provided when the weapon is aligned with a vertical and/or horizontal plane containing the estimated target direction.
The indication may be visual or audible. In a preferred example the colour of a visual indicator is changed when the weapon is aligned with the estimated direction of the target.
The signal is typically detected by a plurality of sensors which may be arranged in a planar array, or in a volumetric array. Preferably the spacing (or baseline) between the sensors is small, in order to reduce the size of the apparatus. Small spacing does however make it difficult to accurately estimate the target direction. Therefore preferably one of the following methods is used to address this problem:
Method iii) is preferred, and is discussed in further detail below with reference to the second aspect of the invention.
The weapon may be a tank or helicopter, but preferably the weapon is a hand-held weapon such as a rifle.
Preferably the (or each) sensor is mounted on the sight of the weapon. This automatically aligns the sensors with the sight and enables more accurate targeting.
The direction and/or range indicators may also be mounted on the sight to provide a compact integrated system.
In U.S. Pat. No. 6,278,141, fine resolution time difference of arrivals, for the shock wave arrivals, are determined via cross-correlation between the channels. The data are interpolated eight times during the cross-correlation process.
A second aspect of the invention provides a method of estimating the direction of arrival of an acoustic pulse, the method comprising:
The second aspect of the invention also provides apparatus for detecting the direction of arrival of an acoustic pulse by the above method, the apparatus comprising an array of sensors; and a processor programmed to perform steps b and c.
The second aspect of the invention provides a processing method which enables the sensor signals to be sampled at a low rate (which may be as low as the Nyquist rate), whilst maintaining an accurate estimate. Spectrally decomposing the sensor signal reduces the effects of noise, compared with a conventional time-of-arrival method in which a threshold crossing point is detected for each sensor. The second aspect of the invention is particularly suited to use in a volumetric sensor with a small baseline.
In one example of the second aspect of the invention, the direction of arrival is calculated by performing a power versus bearing scan. This provides improved accuracy through “bearing coherent” averaging of noise. However for some applications this method may be overcomplicated. Therefore in a preferred embodiment the pulse is detected with a volumetric array of three or more pairs of sensors in step a. so as to generate three or more pairs of sensor signals; a plurality of pairs of spectral components are generated for each pair of sensor signals in step b; and step c. includes calculating a phase delay between each pair of spectral components, and determining the direction of arrival of the acoustic pulse in accordance with the calculated phase delays. The preferred embodiment is computationally simpler than a power versus bearing scan, and also provides improved accuracy through “bearing coherent” averaging of noise.
The method may be used in any suitable application, but in preferred examples it is used to estimate the direction of a target and/or to estimate the trajectory of a projectile.
Various embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings, in which:
a is a schematic view of the rifle in combination with a PDA and communication device;
b is a schematic view of the components of a second acoustic sensor device;
The DSP 22 controls the LEDs 9, and range display 7, and also outputs data to a Bluetooth antenna or other wireless data link.
As shown in
The DSP 22 estimates the direction of the muzzle blast pulse, and the direction of the shock wave pulse. The range is then estimated by the DSP 22 using the method illustrated in
The comparison in step 4 remains valid whilst the translational position in space of the device is close to the position where the sensor array 20 measured the range and direction. This enables the device to give an immediate detection and localization of a target such as a sniper (for example to a particular window or building) after which usual tactics would apply.
The networked system shown in
Extraction of the direction of the target involves two essential steps: (i) measure the propagation delay across the array, and (ii) infer the direction of arrival.
A feature of the sensor array is that it includes three orthogonal axes each with two microphones.
Therefore, direction can simply be extracted by computing the time delay component along each axis, and resolving them to form a direction vector. This direct form of direction estimation is simpler than say a full maximum-likelihood power vs bearing scan of the array, with almost as good results for high SNR pulses.
The preferred method of calculating direction will now be contrasted with other methods which may also be performed by the DSP 22. Three candidate methods are considered in detail:
The relative advantages and disadvantages of each technique are discussed below.
Method ‘a’
The array is small in terms of wavelengths (less than two wavelengths across) which means that if using a direct time-domain measurement method the signals must be sampled at a much higher rate (e.g. 400 kHz vs 20 kHz). This will increase power drain and increase the size of the electronics.
Method ‘b’
The use of correlation-based time measurement means that the necessary high sample rate can be obtained post-correlation, by interpolation. Method ‘b’ also has the advantage over method ‘a’ that using the whole pulse shape provides averaging of the effects of noise, whereas using a threshold-crossing method yields just one time sample per event. However, for sensible length interpolation filters the basic sample rate would have to exceed the Nyquist rate by a factor.
Method ‘c’
Method ‘c’ retains the advantage of method ‘b’ by using the whole pulse shape, but avoids the need to interpolate the correlation output to a very high effective sample rate, so allowing sampling at the Nyquist rate. The phase domain method also provides slightly improved accuracy through ‘bearing coherent’ averaging of noise, rather than just temporal averaging of noise.
Some more explanation of method c. will now be given. An alternative method of using phase in the direction estimation (employing a power vs bearing scan) will also be described.
The signal vector, across all six microphones, for a signal at elevation θ and azimuth θ is as follows:
So the received signal, at true direction (θ0ψ0), in the presence of noise, is
The optimal method of estimating the signal direction, assuming uncorrelated background noise would be to do a power vs bearing scan. ie. for beamweights w given by:
w(θ,ψ,λ)=({overscore (s(θ,ψ,λ))})T
we find the θ and ψ that maximise the following expression
P=w·X·{overscore (w)}T
where
X=x(λ)·{overscore (x(λ))}T
However this is overcomplicated for the preferred application.
Let us consider a modified signal vector, in which opposite microphones along each axis are cross-correlated (or equivalently, the complex frequency-domain signals are multiplied in conjugate).
E.g. taking microphones 0 and 2 we have our correlated x-axis sensor:
But the direction vector of the true signal (in x y z coordinates) is as follows:
Therefore we see the following relationship, from which signal direction is obtained directly:
Therefore, in words, the phase of the cross-correlated microphone pairs, directly yields the signal direction vector, to within a frequency-dependent scale factor. Therefore by analysing the phase of the received pulse, we can estimate the bearing of each spectral component. We can then produce an overall bearing estimate from the power-weighted sum of the component direction vectors. This is not quite optimal (compared to a power bearing scan) but is simpler. Also it does not require any of the microphones to be matched in gain, and only requires them to be phase-matched in pairs, which simplifies construction or calibration of the array.
Example Calculations
Three Algorithms Compared
The three algorithms are compared using a simple simulation.
A band-limited pulse is constructed.
An uncorrelated noise background is obtained by phase-randomising band-limited pulses, to ensure simulation consistency regardless of sample rate.
The scenario is run 100 times, with a different true pulse bearing each time, and the resulting accuracy is compared for the three methods.
Sample rates and data collection block lengths for the three methods:
Nominal pulse, and (approximately) equal energy flat-spectrum pulse used to generate noise.
We assume that the pulse is windowed or gated, so as to exclude extraneous noise.
Common simulation parameters and functions
K:=1000
k:=0 . . . K−1
θk:=2·π·k/K
SNRdB:=16
Method ‘a’
Generate pulses for each of 100 bearings, for 4 microphones (0=north, 1=east, 2=south, 3=west)
Generate noise waveforms
noisea0<k>:=getnoise(Na,fsa,SNRdB)
noisea1<k>:=getnoise(Na,fsa,SNRdB)
noisea2<k>:=getnoise(Na,fsa,SNRdB)
noisea3<k>:=getnoise(Na,fsa,SNRdB)
Pulse detection threshold (say set at 4 sigma wrt noise, or ¼ of the peak, whichever is greater)
Compute times of arrival for each pulse
Compute bearing error for each pulse
θerra
Method ‘b’
Generate pulses for each of 100 bearings, for 4 microphones (0=north, 1=east, 2=south, 3=west)
Generate noise waveforms
noiseb0<k>:=getnoise(Nb,fsb,SNRdB)
noiseb1<k>:=getnoise(Nb,fsb,SNRdB)
noiseb2<k>:=getnoise(Nb,fsb,SNRdB)
noiseb3<k>:=getnoise(Nb,fsb,SNRdB)
n:=0 . . . Nb−1
Compute time delays for each axis by circular correlation and interpolation
Compute each bearing error for each pulse
Method ‘c’
Generate pulses for each of 100 bearings, for 4 microphones (0=north, 1=east, 2=south, 3=west)
Generate noise waveforms
noisec0<k>:=getnoise(Nc,fsc,SNRdB)
noisec1<k>:=getnoise(Nc,fsc,SNRdB)
noisec2<k>:=getnoise(Nc,fsc,SNRdB)
noisec3<k>:=getnoise(Nc,fsc,SNRdB)
n:=0 . . . Nc−1
Compute spectra for each microphone
Xc0<k>:=FFT(pulsec0<k>+noisec0<k>)
Xc1<k>:=FFT(pulsec1<k>+noisec1<k>)
Xc2<k>:=FFT(pulsec2<k>+noisec2<k>)
Xc3<k>:=FFT(pulsec3<k>+noisec3<k>)
Compute bulk delays (by circular correlation, without interpolation) to a resolution of 1 sample (ie. half wavelength max) to eliminate phase ambiguity.
Compute direction vector spectrum, accounting for bulk delay phase ambiguity.
Frequency Resolution:
Compute weighted sum direction vector
Compute bearing error for each pulse
Now compare the three results:
So typically method c wins, whether compared in terms of standard deviation, median, or maximum error. However, the advantage is not overwhelming, so the main advantage is that we can use a lower sample rate (and hence use less standby power).
Note that this analysis does not account for frequency-dependent bearing distortion (e.g. short multipath reception), and so there may be further, possibly more significant, advantages in bearing coherent processing when more complex environments are considered.
Although the invention has been described above with reference to one or more preferred embodiments, it will be appreciated that various changes or modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| GB 0503212.3 | Feb 2005 | GB | national |