Use of a Coverage Analysis Extension for Performance Metric ...
U off a C Use Coverage A Analysis l i E Extension t i ffor Performance Metric Calculation Jean-Denis Caron and Neil Carson Defence Research and Development Canada 16 July 2009 ESRI User Conference, San Diego, Paper #1141 Defence Research and Recherche et développement Development Canadaand pour la défense Defence Research Recherche et Canada développement Development Canada pour la défense Canada
Canada Canada
Outline • Background • Problem • Model for Analysis of Sensor Coverage (MASC) • Metrics • Results R l • Conclusions
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
2
Background Objective To quantify and evaluate the increased radar coverage capability for different location options
Approach Develop a line-of-sight radar coverage calculation tool Design objective metrics for comparison of different radar coverages
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
3
Problem (fictitious) • Kananaskis, AB, Canada will be hosting a special event – Has to maintain airspace awareness out to 75 nm at 5,000 ft Alb t Alberta
– Large mountain range to the West – Currently only has 1 radar location (Site 1) – Where is best location for a second radar (Site 2 or Site 3)?
British Columbia
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
4
MASC (1/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking Basic Line-of-Sight Coverage
Terrain-Masked Line-of-Sight Coverage
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
5
MASC (2/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking
Sensor Terrain-Masked Coverage
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
6
MASC (3/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking • In 2005 – DRDC CORA integrated MASC capabilities within ESRI ArcGIS in order to exploit commercial i l GIS modeling d li and d analysis l i capabilities biliti
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
7
MASC – Inputs Sensor Types
Altitudes
Sites Locations
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
8
MASC – Outputs • A list of shapefiles (spatial file format compatible with ArcGIS), ), containing g the LOS coverage g
Once in ArcGIS, you can exploit the analysis capability available in ArcGIS
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
9
Parameters Control Ring Range: 75 nm Elevation: 5,000 ft AGL Site 1 Range: 60 nm Azimuth: 0-360 deg Elevation: 5,272 ft Antenna height: 0 fft Site 3 Range: 60 nm Azimuth: 0 0-360 360 deg Elevation: 3,406 ft Antenna height: 0 ft Site 2 R Range: 80 nm Azimuth: 0-360 deg Elevation: 3,865 ft Antenna height: 50 ft
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
10
Metrics • Problem – Which is the better option, adding a radar at Site 2 or Site 3? • Need to answer these two questions – Does coverage allow for detection along the control ring? g ((i.e. tripwire) p ) – Does coverage allow for tracking inside the control ring? (i.e. maintain tracking capability) • Two metrics were developed
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
11
Circumference Coverage Metric (CCM)
L2
Minimum DID ring
Radar coverage
CCM = L2 divided by L1
L1 Ratio between 0 and 1
• Ratio of radar coverage along the control ring against i t total t t l circumference i f off the th control t l ring i • Quantifies: How much of control ring is covered by radar? Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
12
Interior Coverage Metric (ICM)
A1
Minimum DID ring
A2
Radar coverage
ICM = A2 divided by A1
Ratio between 0 and 1
• Ratio of total area covered inside the control ring against total possible covered area • Quantifies: What is ability to maintain radar coverage of an incoming track and ability to detect “popups”? Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
13
Results – MASC • Shapefiles showing coverage at 5,000 ft AGL calculated using g MASC Sites 1 & 2
Sites 1 & 3
• Very difficult to tell which is the better option visually Note effects of terrain masking due to mountains to the West Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
14
Results – Metrics Sites 1 & 2
Sites 1 & 3
Covered C d Circumference: Sites 1& 227 nm2
Covered C d Circumference: Sites Sites 1236 & 13 & nm2
Area: 10 557 nm2 10,557
Control Ring Circumference: 471 nm Area: 17,672 nm2
Area: 10 568 nm2 10,568
•
Areas and polyline lengths calculated using – ArcToolbox functions (e.g. union, intersect, dissolve) – Custom scripts *.cal ( (e.g. length, l th area))
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
15
Results – Metrics Radar Sites
CCM
ICM
1&2
48 2 % 48.2
59 7 % 59.7
1&3
50.0 %
59.7 %
• Observations – Same interior coverage • Site 2 provides slightly more coverage in the mountains • Site 3 provides slightly more coverage on the plains – Site 3 gives ~2% more coverage along the Control Ring
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
16
Conclusions • Demonstrates an ArcGIS extension for calculation of line-of-site line of site radar coverage • Shows utility of using coverage metrics for evaluation of radar location options • Can be applied to real-world problems using multiple radar locations and varying control rings g
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
17
Contacts Neil Carson (719) 554-3718 [email protected]
Jean-Denis Caron (719) 556-5751 [email protected] @ g
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
18
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
19
Canada Canada
Outline • Background • Problem • Model for Analysis of Sensor Coverage (MASC) • Metrics • Results R l • Conclusions
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
2
Background Objective To quantify and evaluate the increased radar coverage capability for different location options
Approach Develop a line-of-sight radar coverage calculation tool Design objective metrics for comparison of different radar coverages
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
3
Problem (fictitious) • Kananaskis, AB, Canada will be hosting a special event – Has to maintain airspace awareness out to 75 nm at 5,000 ft Alb t Alberta
– Large mountain range to the West – Currently only has 1 radar location (Site 1) – Where is best location for a second radar (Site 2 or Site 3)?
British Columbia
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
4
MASC (1/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking Basic Line-of-Sight Coverage
Terrain-Masked Line-of-Sight Coverage
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
5
MASC (2/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking
Sensor Terrain-Masked Coverage
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
6
MASC (3/3) • Canada started to fund the development of MASC in 1990;; DRDC scientists working g from NORAD have been involved in its development ever since • The tool computes the line-of-sight (LOS) coverage of sensors given terrain terrain-masking masking • In 2005 – DRDC CORA integrated MASC capabilities within ESRI ArcGIS in order to exploit commercial i l GIS modeling d li and d analysis l i capabilities biliti
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
7
MASC – Inputs Sensor Types
Altitudes
Sites Locations
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
8
MASC – Outputs • A list of shapefiles (spatial file format compatible with ArcGIS), ), containing g the LOS coverage g
Once in ArcGIS, you can exploit the analysis capability available in ArcGIS
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
9
Parameters Control Ring Range: 75 nm Elevation: 5,000 ft AGL Site 1 Range: 60 nm Azimuth: 0-360 deg Elevation: 5,272 ft Antenna height: 0 fft Site 3 Range: 60 nm Azimuth: 0 0-360 360 deg Elevation: 3,406 ft Antenna height: 0 ft Site 2 R Range: 80 nm Azimuth: 0-360 deg Elevation: 3,865 ft Antenna height: 50 ft
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
10
Metrics • Problem – Which is the better option, adding a radar at Site 2 or Site 3? • Need to answer these two questions – Does coverage allow for detection along the control ring? g ((i.e. tripwire) p ) – Does coverage allow for tracking inside the control ring? (i.e. maintain tracking capability) • Two metrics were developed
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
11
Circumference Coverage Metric (CCM)
L2
Minimum DID ring
Radar coverage
CCM = L2 divided by L1
L1 Ratio between 0 and 1
• Ratio of radar coverage along the control ring against i t total t t l circumference i f off the th control t l ring i • Quantifies: How much of control ring is covered by radar? Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
12
Interior Coverage Metric (ICM)
A1
Minimum DID ring
A2
Radar coverage
ICM = A2 divided by A1
Ratio between 0 and 1
• Ratio of total area covered inside the control ring against total possible covered area • Quantifies: What is ability to maintain radar coverage of an incoming track and ability to detect “popups”? Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
13
Results – MASC • Shapefiles showing coverage at 5,000 ft AGL calculated using g MASC Sites 1 & 2
Sites 1 & 3
• Very difficult to tell which is the better option visually Note effects of terrain masking due to mountains to the West Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
14
Results – Metrics Sites 1 & 2
Sites 1 & 3
Covered C d Circumference: Sites 1& 227 nm2
Covered C d Circumference: Sites Sites 1236 & 13 & nm2
Area: 10 557 nm2 10,557
Control Ring Circumference: 471 nm Area: 17,672 nm2
Area: 10 568 nm2 10,568
•
Areas and polyline lengths calculated using – ArcToolbox functions (e.g. union, intersect, dissolve) – Custom scripts *.cal ( (e.g. length, l th area))
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
15
Results – Metrics Radar Sites
CCM
ICM
1&2
48 2 % 48.2
59 7 % 59.7
1&3
50.0 %
59.7 %
• Observations – Same interior coverage • Site 2 provides slightly more coverage in the mountains • Site 3 provides slightly more coverage on the plains – Site 3 gives ~2% more coverage along the Control Ring
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
16
Conclusions • Demonstrates an ArcGIS extension for calculation of line-of-site line of site radar coverage • Shows utility of using coverage metrics for evaluation of radar location options • Can be applied to real-world problems using multiple radar locations and varying control rings g
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
17
Contacts Neil Carson (719) 554-3718 [email protected]
Jean-Denis Caron (719) 556-5751 [email protected] @ g
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
18
Defence R&D Canada
•
R & D pour la défense Canada
19
