Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal · Web viewIntruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal. 23. 08Fall. 08. Fall. Intruder Detection and Prevention

08

Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal

Table of Contents1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................... 1

2 BUSINESS CASE................................................................................................................................. 22.1 PERSONNEL SHORTAGES................................................................................................................................32.2 INCREASED THREAT.......................................................................................................................................32.3 DEFENSE BUDGET CUTS.................................................................................................................................42.4 SYSTEM JUSTIFICATION..................................................................................................................................4

3 CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS...........................................................................................................53.1 ID&PS OVERVIEW..........................................................................................................................................53.2 MISSION............................................................................................................................................................53.3 CONCEPT OF PROPOSED SYSTEM..................................................................................................................53.4 OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT......................................................................................................................73.5 OPERATIONAL MODES....................................................................................................................................73.6 DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................8

3.6.1 Deployment Considerations.............................................................................................................. 83.6.2 Users........................................................................................................................................................... 83.6.3 Requirements for Service................................................................................................................... 8

3.7 OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS.............................................................................................................................93.7.1 Background on typical military bases..........................................................................................9

3.8 BUSINESS IMPACTS.......................................................................................................................................113.9 RATIONALE.................................................................................................................................................... 123.10 CONCEPTUAL MODEL...................................................................................................................................12

4 SYSTEM CONCEPTS.......................................................................................................................154.1 EXTERNAL INTERFACES.............................................................................................................................154.2 SYSTEM CAPABILITIES.................................................................................................................................174.3 SYSTEM FUNCTIONS.....................................................................................................................................174.4 SYSTEM COMPONENTS.................................................................................................................................18

5 OBJECTIVE SYSTEM KEY PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS.................................................19

6 DEMONSTRATION........................................................................................................................ 20

7 INTEGRATED DICTIONARY (AV-2)......................................................................................... 25

ii Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal

Table of FiguresFigure 1 US Military Presence Around the World........................................................................2Figure 2 South Korean Protesters Attempt to Pull Down Fence of US Air Base.............4Figure 3 High-Level Operational Concept of ID&PS....................................................................6Figure 4 Enabling Products.................................................................................................................... 8Figure 5 Domestic Military Base..........................................................................................................9Figure 6 Intruders Attempted to Break in with Ladders........................................................10Figure 7 ID&PS Flow Chart.................................................................................................................. 13Figure 8 Operational Connectivity Diagram.................................................................................14Figure 9 Interface Flow Diagram.......................................................................................................15Figure 10 ID&PS Interfaces to External Systems (SV-1).........................................................16Figure 11 Sample Layout of ID&PS and Intrusion Events Detected by Sensors..........18Figure 12 Product Breakdown Structure of ID&PS...................................................................19Figure 13 High-Level Simulation Architecture...........................................................................22Figure 14 High-Level Data Analysis Architecture......................................................................22Figure 15 Real-Time Simulation Dashboard................................................................................23Figure 16 Data Analysis Tool GUI.....................................................................................................24

Table of Tables

Table 1 Operational Mode Map.............................................................................................................7Table 2 Interface Control Diagram...................................................................................................14Table 3 External Interfaces..................................................................................................................16Table 4 KPP Table.................................................................................................................................... 20

Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal iii

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

For most of the modern era, the United States continues to maintain its position as the foremost political, economic, and military entity in the world. Seldom has history seen such a dominant, unilateral power on the international scene. Nonetheless, we find ourselves in the midst of a global war on terror, armed conflict in Afghanistan and Iraq, and challenged by an international environment of potentially intense confrontation and hostility. Clearly we have rivals who resent our international preeminence. Just as clearly, others will emerge in the future.

Historically, we have shifted our own security posture accordingly to counter the multitude of different threats. We have undertaken a transformation of strategy that is far-reaching in its implications on our ability to defend ourselves at home and to pursue our interests in the world. We have formulated new doctrines, organized new unit structures, developed new weapons, communications, intelligence, logistics, and command and control systems, and sought new allies and altered basing locations at home and abroad.

However, all these accomplishments and constant improvements are not enough. We must continue adopting new techniques and procedures, shifting our forces around the globe, and otherwise launching a myriad of innovations if we plan on being the premiere military force in the world. We can start by presenting a case for the US government, under the Department of Defense, to implement the Intrusion Detection & Prevention System (ID&PS) for military bases.

Military bases are facilities directly owned and operated by or for the military that shelter powerful military equipment, classified operations information and highly trained personnel. In general, a military base provides accommodations for several units, but it may also be used as a command center, a training ground, or a proving ground. Needless to say, the total increased security of the base and its priceless assets are of paramount importance not only to the military but crucial for ongoing US national security efforts.

Defense officials have moved carefully to set up new programs, trying to balance the protection of the nation's personnel and sensitive information within the armed forces, with the privacy and civil rights of other Americans as well as citizens of the world. The Team 3 Corporation is convinced that these officials will endorse the system for widespread integration into United States military bases worldwide after evaluation.

Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal 1

2 BUSINESS CASE

The military of the United States is deployed in more than 150 countries around the world (Figure 1) with 196,248 of its 1,414,149 active-duty personnel stationed outside of the United States and its territories. Many of the military installations have been activated during the Cold War, by which the US government sought to challenge the Soviet Union in the aftermath of World War II. Other bases have been established during Operation Desert Storm. Many of those bases are now being used to support the fight against terrorism and to counter foreign powers that pose threat against the interests of the United States and its allies.

Figure 1 US Military Presence Around the World1

Military police and security forces are responsible for security and protection of all base assets, military and Government personnel (including dependents) inside the base. The personal and facilities are the most critical elements of the base mission as they directly impact upon the military’s ability to carry out its mission. Military police rely on base parameter fences and walls as the first line of defense against base intrusion. Video cameras and security personnel patrolling the base 24/7 supplement this security measure. The current measures have fallen short of

1 CNN.com

2 Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal

providing adequate security for the base because of three challenges: short in personnel, increased threat, and Department of Defense budget cuts2.

2.1 Personnel Shortages

The US military have been stretched thin because of the frequent and long deployment required supporting the global war on terrorism. This left a big void on security of US bases. As a temporary solution, the department of defense has hired private security firms to provide security to US and overseas bases, but this turned out to be in adequate because of the cost and the difference in rules that apply to military personal and civilian security officers. Some bases have turned to National Guard and service members from different career field to augment base security. This has caused hurdles in the execution of military missions since service member augmenters became busy guarding bases instead of performing their primary duties.

2.2 Increased Threat

The threats against military bases have come from two fronts: terrorism and protestors. Many foreign and homegrown terrorists have made military bases as their target of choice. Many operations continue to be carried out in regular bases by terrorists around the world against military installations. Furthermore, many planned terrorist attacks by homegrown terrorists have been diverted by law enforcements in the United States. The success of these operations can cause fatalities and heavy cost on military missions. In addition, many people opposing US policies and the presence of military installations in their country have been protesting around US military installations (Figure 2). Very often, many of these protests turn violent when protestors try to break-into the base. With the bases’ parameter stretching over miles of land and with the shortage in number of security forces that can intervene at any spot on the base, it is becoming harder to keep protestors from base invasion.

2 http://www.hilltoptimes.com/content/guarding-gates-now-department-air-force


Figure 2 South Korean Protesters Attempt to Pull Down Fence of US Air Base3

2.3 Defense Budget Cuts

Because of budget deficit, the US government has significantly cut the Department of Defense budget. Furthermore, the federal budget is to be cut automatically by up to $1.2 trillion on Jan. 2, 2013 unless Congress and the President devise an alternate plan. Half of those cuts would come from defense and intelligence spending and that could have a serious impact on the budget allocated to the security of the base. The cost of the traditional way of securing bases can turn to be higher than what can be afforded.

2.4 System JustificationThe Intrusion Detection & Protection System (ID&PS) is the worldwide solution against military base intrusions. The system is designed to protect bases and eliminate recurring costs. The system will detect any intruder, process data, and respond to operator commands to fire at the intruder with non-lethal weapon. ID&PS addresses all three security issues outlined above. The system requires fewer personnel to guard the base. One system can engage more intruders than 20 police officers. The system also provides stronger barrier and faster response than police officers. It takes in average 5 to 10 minutes for a patrol car to get to a scene of intrusion. It only takes 8 seconds for ID&PS to engage an intruder. In addition,

3 http://cryptome.org


ID&PD eliminates recurring costs of training, salaries and equipment for security personnel. Team 3 Corporation is convinced that base officials will endorse the system for widespread integration into United States military bases worldwide after evaluation.

3 Concept of Operations

3.1 ID&PS Overview

The Intrusion Detection & Protection System (ID&PS) focuses on providing full security coverage for mobilizing and deterring base intruders. ID&PS will increase significantly the security level of the base while decreasing the number of security officers required to guard base parameters. ID&PS can be operated by a single officer (or two officers for faster response). This will cut down security costs significantly.

3.2 MISSION

The mission of ID&PS is to detect, engage and stop intruders within a controlled area before they enter the U.S. military base interior perimeter. An intruder is someone (protester, spy, terrorist, etc), who ignored the warning signs and intent to enter the base unauthorized.

3.3 Concept of proposed system

Figure 3 below shows the operational concept of ID&PS. The system shall detect potential intruder by a combination of sensors, such as thermal, motion, vibration, pressure and acoustic. The sensory data is constantly transmitted to the Processing, Communication and Response System (hereafter referred to as PCRS) along with live video feed. The weather station is also constantly transmitting weather information such as humidity, temperature and air pressure to the PCRS. The weather information is important for the accuracy of the sensory data since the military bases are located in different regions of the world.

PCRS is the core of the proposed system. It receives data from detection sensors, weather station, as well as threat information from external sources such as Department of State and military intelligence. PCRS shall process all these data, compare them with known statistical data (body temperature, speed, weigh, pressure on the fence when someone is climbing on it, etc) to determine whether the detected object is a wild animal, a person walking by the fence, or simply wind blowing. The system shall rule out false positive detections and alert the operator by sending detection result and video feed from the closest video camera where the detection is found. PCRS is also the main component responsible for the communication between all the subsystems and external interfaces.


The Monitoring System receives potential intrusion alert from PCRS. An indicator shows the threat level. The monitoring system also shows the detection result, location and the live video feed of the intrusion from the nearest video camera. Another main function of the monitoring system is taking command from the operator. The operator shall review the information and video presented by monitoring system. The operator shall then decide actions to take, such as notify the military police, warn and advise intruder to stop before trespassing via warning device (recorded warning message, spot light, or flashing lights). If the intruder continues to proceed forward, the operator can aim and fire upon the intruder. Commands from the operator are entered through the monitoring system (keyboard, joystick), and then sent to the MP, warning device and weapon through the PCRS.

The weapon system consists of video camera for target aiming, warning device, and less-lethal weapon. Some of the potential options for the weapon are long-range taser, beanbag gun, paint ball gun, and direct energy devices such as infrared or acoustic.


Figure 3 High-Level Operational Concept of ID&PS

3.4 Operational Environment

The ID&PS is a land-based system. The following are the operational environment requirements.

Climate operationo -40 o F to 150o Fo Low to high pressureo Humidity up to 70%

Must be able to withstand heavy rain, snow, sand storm and hurricane


Processing, Communication & Response System(Send & Receive)

Receive data from sensors Receive data from weather stationReceive data from external systemsProcess external systems dataProcess sensor and weather dataSend result to monitoring systemSend video feed to monitoring systemReceive operator commandSend command to weaponSend Notification to MP

Monitoring System(Send & Receive)

Display intrusion analysis resultDisplay live videoSend command to the weapon

Operators(Send & Receive)

Review the intrusionSend WarningNotify MPAim and fire weapon

Weapon System(Send & Receive)WarningAiming directionDirect EnergyVideo feed

Weather Station(Send)

TemperatureHumiditypressure

Detection

Sensors(Send)

Thermal MotionVibrationPressureSound

System StatusAnalysis ResultDisplay/Data Entry

Sensor receiverWS receiverExternal system interfacesProcessorWeapon interfaceMonitoring system interface

Terrain elevation up to 20,000 feet 24 hour operation Standard TCP/IP network connectivity Wireless network connection with WPA2 encryption protocol

3.5 Operational Modes

The Operational Mode Map showed in table 1 map the modes performed within each subsystem.

Detect mode: used to detect potential intruders within sensor range and provide the data to PCRS

Analysis mode: used to determine whether the detected object is a valid intruder

Deterrence mode: used to engage intruder in a less-lethal wayInitialization mode: used to start up the system after a power off or initial setupDiagnostic mode: used to troubleshoot system issues or verify system is

operationalMaintenance mode: used for software/firmware updates, repair, part replacement

Table 1 Operational Mode Map

System Component

Modes

Detect Analyze Deterrence Initialize Diagnostic MaintenanceDetection System X X X X

Operator XWeather Station X X X X

PCRS X X X X XMonitoring System X X X X

Less-lethal Weapon X X X X

3.6 Deployment and Operational Requirements

3.6.1 Deployment Considerations

Video camera requires outdoor camera dome to protect against extreme weather and dust.

Less-lethal weapon locations must allow space for the weapon to adjust firing direction.

The detection system will require minimum two different types of senor to minimize the detection error.


The weapon requires a clear aim at the fence without any obstacle in its path. The system requires minimum two operators on shift to ensure around the

clock coverage.

3.6.2 Users United States Army, Navy, Marine and Air Force Military base MP Civilian security contractors Maintenance Personnel – Performs routine maintenance on ID&PS Field Engineer – perform system installation, upgrades and testing

3.6.3 Requirements for Service

Figure 4 Enabling Products

3.7 Operational Scenarios

The purpose of the ID&PS is to provide additional security to US military bases, particularly those camps stationed in hostile areas. This system acts based on the inputs received from stationed site sensors, and video images from the surrounding surveillance cameras. Analysis based on the objects behavior or physical characteristics (such as size, weight and other unique characteristics) are used to determine if the object is an intruder or a security officer. In order to provide the required performance the structural/environmental features of a typical military base would need to be studied.


3.7.1 Background on typical military bases

Some of the US military bases are enclosed by double fences. However, as shown in the figure below, there are also some bases that do not have double fences; they have only one fence surrounding the camp with a few internal fences covering important buildings within the base. Most fences are barbed wire fences, which makes it difficult for a person to scale them.

Figure 5 Domestic Military Base4

The fences are standard in height, approximately six to seven feet tall. The figure below shows protesters used a ladder to climb over the barb wired fence.

4 www.shutterstock.com


Figure 6 Intruders attempted to break in with ladder5

There are a few scenarios in which a response could be triggered; these scenarios are grouped according to location, speed and number of intruders. The system would alert the operator on the level of threat using color coding with red being the highest threat, orange being a threat and yellow being a possible threat.

Depending on the type of sensor selected, threat could also be determined by the physical characteristics of the intruder(s). With a sensor that is capable of profiling subjects, alerts would be sent based on a positive profile match.

A list of scenarios that would that would trigger different alerts is given below.

These scenarios are intended to help the customer know what threat level they are facing, however the choice of when to take action is left for the operator as different regions might require different responses based on the hostility of the area

Scenario 1The sensor detects an object within range walking towards the outer fence.

Action: After PCRS analyzes the sensory input, it sends out a signal indicating that there is a possible threat; the color indicated on the monitoring system would be yellow.

Scenario 2The sensor detects an object within range running towards the outer fence.

5 http://wafreepress.org/article/100102military-groundzero.shtml


Action: After PCRS analyzes the sensory input, it sends out a signal indicating that there is a threat; the color indicated on the monitoring system would be orange.

Scenario 3The sensor detects an object within range located in between the outer and inner fence.

Action: After PCRS analyzes the sensory input, it sends out a signal indicating that there is a high threat; the color indicated on the monitoring system would be red.

Scenario 4The sensor detects a group of objects within range walking towards the direction of the outer fence.

Action: After PCRS analyzes the sensory input, it shall send out a signal indicating a threat, the color indicated on the monitoring system would be orange.

Scenario 5The sensor detects a group of objects within range running towards the direction of the outer fence.

Action: After PCRS analyzes the sensory input, it shall send out a signal indicating a high threat, the color indicated on the monitoring system would be red.

3.8 Business Impacts

The ID-PS system would have business impacts in three major areas; Cost reduction, infrastructure and maintenance/training.

Reduced CostThe primary business impact our system would have is that it’s going to reduce the amount of security personnel needed to guard the base; this would result to a reduction in the amount of money needed to deploy them. In addition to that, by providing the ability to monitor and prevent potentially dangerous intruders, more lives would be saved and fewer injuries would be sustained.

InfrastructureImplementing the ID-PS system would result to a few adjustments to the already established structure in the bases. Certain areas that would have otherwise been used for a different purpose would have to be designated for components of the system such as the sensors, cameras, wire network, and generators/batteries. The ID&PS is designed on the premise that the customer base station comes equipped with two surrounding fences, in a situation where that is not the case the customer would have to make provision for an additional fence in order to have the system


reach its maximum effectiveness, and this is because the presence of two physical fences makes it difficult for the intruder to reach critical points in the base thereby increasing the reaction time of the operator.

Maintenance/TrainingThe system would require periodic maintenance as well as personnel training. A significant amount of time would be needed to ensure that the images and data feed gotten from the detection system are precise and accurate. Also to ensure that the system would significantly reduce the risk of military camps getting attacked, operators would require training on how the system works and more importantly, they would need training on how to use the system and what situations require a response.

Depending on how the sensor is triggered, the security/patrol officers would have to have a patrol pattern that is recognizable by the system so as to help the system better differentiate them from an intruder(s) thereby reducing possibilities of false alarms.

3.9 Rationale

Currently the military bases do not have enough security officers to respond to intruders, particularly rioters trying to get into the camps. The ID&PS helps the security officers in such situations to better monitor and take appropriate actions.

With the use of less-lethal weapons, the system makes it possible for a single security officer to respond to a group of intruders at the same time without causing significant bodily harm to them. Usually one of the problems that service members face abroad is that they can’t respond to threat accordingly because of the type of weaponry they have at their disposal, should they make the mistake of killing a civilian while trying to protect themselves; it becomes a big political issue.

3.10 Conceptual Model

The conceptual flow diagram of our system is shown in the figure 7 below. The system is primarily comprised of three major sub-systems, the detection system, the PCRS and the monitoring system. The detector system comprises of the sensors and cameras, the PCRS receives input from the detection system and processes the data then sends it to the monitoring system, which displays the output to the operator. Based on what the operator receives, he makes a decision on whether to fire on the subject or not, this decision is sent back to the PCRS’s weapon control system, which allows a shot to be taken. The sensors are mounted on strategic points, they detect the position of an object and based on some evaluation can tell if the object has the characteristic of a security officer or an intruder. If the subject is a confirmed


security officer no action would be taken however if the subject posses traits of an intruder, a signal is sent to the monitoring system so that the operation can respond to the threat.

Figure 7 ID&PS Flow Chart

The Operational Connectivity Diagram, shown below in figure 8, illustrates the high-level interaction between the five major subsystems of ID&PS. Table 2 and Figure 9 further describe the input and output of the subsystems.


Figure 8 Operational Connectivity Diagram

Table 2 Interface Control Diagram

Source Destination Description Format Protocol Volume Timing SecuritySystem Subsystem System SubsystemDetection Camera PCRS Processor Image Data Graphic TCP/IP As

NeededMedium

Detection Sensor PCRS Processor Radar Data Text TCP/IP As Needed

High

PCRS Processor Monitoring

Display Image/Radar Data

Graphic/ Text

TCP/IP As Needed

Medium

Detection Camera PCRS Server Camera Status

Text TCP/IP As Needed

Medium

Detection Sensor PCRS Server Sensor Status

Text TCP/IP As Needed

High

Weather Control

Weather System

PCRS Processor Weather Info

XML TCP/IP As Needed

Low


Figure 9 Interface Flow Diagram

4 System Concepts

4.1 External Interfaces

Figure 10 shows the System Boundary Diagram (SV-1) for the ID&PS. It shows all the external systems required to provide information necessary for ID&PS to successfully perform its mission.


Figure 10 ID&PS interfaces to external systems (SV-1)

Table 3 External Interfaces

External Interfaces Description & Key Information ProvidedMilitary Intelligence Military intelligence collects information about

security threats against the base. The security information is shared with military units and law enforcements.

Department of State (DOS) The DOS issues travel alert and warning about every country. Warning might include unstable government, civil war, frequent terrorist attacks, strikes, demonstrations, and hate crime against American, etc. ID&PS will notify DOS when an intrusion occurs in case diplomacy involvement is needed.

Environmental Factors The environmental factors play a critical role on sensor performance. Since many of our military bases located in area with extreme terrain and


climate, sensor modes will be adjusted according to the local air pressure and terrain.

Comm. Infrastructure ID&PS subsystems need to communicate with each other. The base communications cabling and terminals will be used to provide the link.

Power Supply Power is a required external system to ID&PS. Base power supplies must be provided on an uninterrupted level. Some bases might depend on generators to provide electricity.

Base MP (Military Police) Base MP is the existing site security. ID&PS will send alert to base MP when engaging intruders. MP can also contact system operator when possible intrusion is detected visually.

Fences The fences surround the base is the first line of defense. The area between 2 fences creates a mantrap and can help slowing down the intruders.

4.2 System Capabilities

Below is a list of capabilities of ID&PS. Provide detection of intruders. Process and analyze multiple types of sensory data Obtain and process real time weather information Gather multiple types of sensory data Provide live visual of intruders Manual control of the weapon for firing and aiming Deter the intruders Notify the military police

4.3 System Functions

The system shall detect potential intruders within sensor range. The sensors shall detect and send sensory data to PCRS constantly. PCRS will then process and analyze the data to determine whether a positive intrusion has been detected. When a positive intrusion is confirmed, PCRS will display an alert to the operator along with live video feed. Operator will have time to respond to the intrusion when the intruder enters the area between fence 1 and fence 2. Figure 11 below shows the basic layout of ID&PS based on the map of Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo.


Sensor Range

Weapon

Intruder

Fence 1

Fence 2

Figure 11 Sample layout of ID&PS and intrusion events detected by sensor6

4.4 System Components

Figure 12 below is the Product Breakdown Structure that shows the major system components. The Detection system provides live video feed and all the sensory inputs when intrusion is detected. The Operator controls the less-lethal weapon to engage the intruder after receiving an alert. The monitoring system allows the operator to view the detail information of the intrusion and video feed. The operator can adjust the position and angle of the weapon utilizing the joystick. PCRS is the core of ID&PS, which analyzes the input data and communicates with the monitoring system and the weapon. The less-lethal weapon has video camera to allow operator to view and aim at the intruder. It also has warning device which could be used to warn intruder before they physically climb over the fence. Direct energy device will cause intruders to feel discomfort or disoriented when fired upon. The weather station will provide real time information on wind vane,

6 Google Earth view of Camp Bondsteel, Kosovo


temperature, humidity and pressure. Weather information is used by PCRS along with sensory inputs to calculate and analyze whether an intrusion has occurred.

Figure 12 Product Breakdown Structure for ID&PS

5 Objective System Key Performance Parameters

The ID&PS will be deemed acceptable by the customer upon satisfying five fundamental Key Performance Parameters (KPPs). These KPPs are listed and elaborated on in Table 4.

Table 4 KPP Table

Key Performance ParametersKPP

#Identifier Description KPP Value

1.0.0 Success Rate The probability with which the system is capable of detecting and physically

P(Success) > 0.98


ID&PS

Detection

System

PCRS

Monitoring Syste

m

Less-Letha

l Weap

on

Operator

Video

Camera

Sensors

Joystick

Display

Weapon Control

System

Communicatio

n Processor

WLAN/

LAN

Central

Processor

Weather

Station

Data Logg

er

Sensors

Video

Camera

Warning

Device

Direct

Energy

Device

preventing a single intruder from entering the facility.

2.0.0Weapon

Range

The maximum distance (in meters) between a target and weapon component where a fired weapon will be successful in incapacitating the target.

R > 50 Meters

3.0.0Sensor

Detection Reliability

The probability of a true positive detection of an intruder traveling at a rate of 7.0 m/s.

P(Detection | Intruder

Present) > 0.98

4.0.0Time To

Engagement

The average amount of time (in seconds) that occurs between the first sensor identifying a perceived intruder and the instant a weapon system engages the intruder. This time does not account for the amount of time it takes for the decision maker to make fire decision.

T < 2.5 Seconds

5.0.0

Max Intruder

Engagement Capability

The minimum number of intruders that a single weapon component can engage at one time. The system must successfully handle this load with P(Success) > 0.80

N > 1 intruder

Each KPP was selected to ensure that the performance of the system fulfills the needs of the customer. The success rate can be viewed as a culmination of all other KPP’s, as it addresses the primary goal of the system, keeping an intruder from entering the base. The second KPP, weapon range, was selected to ensure that in any base geometry, there would be full coverage in terms of weapon engagement capability. Sensor detection reliability was selected in order to ensure that intruders would be detected with a probability high enough to enable successful fulfillment of KPP1. Time to engagement was selected at 2.5 seconds to allow for the system operator to make a decision as to whether the target is a threat or not before the intruder is able to make his way outside of the strike capability of the weapon. The fifth and final KPP was selected to ensure that each weapon could successfully engage one intruder by itself. As long as this is the case, the number of weapons can be scaled up to address different threat levels in different bases, as the needs of each individual base is not the same as other military bases in other parts of the world.

6 Demonstration

In order to validate the feasibility of the KPP’s (Section 6) developed with consideration to customer and vendor input, various models will be integrated into a software simulation that mimics the behavior of both system and environmental components. This simulation will be developed throughout the lifecycle of the


program and will be used not only for system validation but for system design as well.

The MatLab programming language will be utilized to develop a discrete time event driven simulation that will utilize various user adjustable models that will conspire to form a full scope model of the ID&PS. The overarching model has been designed in a modular fashion, each module representing a key component of the system. These components consist of those internal to the system in the form of a sensor, weapon, or operator component, and external to the system in terms of potential intruders and the geographical configuration of the base itself. This modular approach allows each low level model to be implemented independent of the core simulation, allowing for the model to be tweaked and adjusted without affecting the core simulation design. Doing so will allow the system designers to perform analysis on the various COTS components and configurations of components through user entered model characteristics to ensure that the final system achieves the greatest probability of satisfying its KPP’s.

Models for Intruders, Bases of Operation, Weapons Systems, and Sensor Systems will be developed with realistic characteristics based off of research on human performance and COTS system performances. Models will be user configurable to account for varying performance characteristics. This fluid characteristic of the simulation will be highly useful when analyzing a system configuration that satisfies KPP4 and any other KPP area that is affected by system configuration.

As Figures 13 and 14 show, the demonstration implementation has been distributed across two main components, simulation and data analysis. In simulating the performance of the ID&PS there two actions that are critical to garnering meaningful information related to the systems ability to satisfy KPPs. The first is the actual simulation (Figure 13) that leverages system component models to perform real time, event driven calculations that simulate how the overarching system will perform under various conditions. This portion of the demonstration will operate in discrete time and log prescribed performance metrics to a database for future analysis. These two portions were separated, as they are really two separate problems that must be solved by the simulation. As long as the interface between the two is well established, documented, and followed, changes to either component will not affect the other component’s code base.

The second portion of the demonstration (Figure 14) consists of three major components, parsing the raw output data of the simulation, making meaning of the data, and displaying the data in a format that allows the user to quickly and efficiently derive meaning from the simulation. Each KPP will be validated with its own specific type of data, be it graphical or statistical, depending on what type of information is considered relevant to the observer.


Figure 33 High-Level Simulation Architecture

Figure 14 High-Level Data Analysis Architecture


The main simulation UI component will employ several windows generated by the MatLab software. The UI will be tied directly into the simulation code, so that the user can have the option to view the asynchronous events that occur throughout the lifecycle of the simulation. Additionally, the user will have the option to run the simulation over a prescribed time period without slowing it down to viewable rates, skipping straight to the data analysis portion. A sample GUI configuration for the simulation dashboard can be found in Figure 15, and a sample GUI configuration for the post-simulation analysis window can be found in Figure 16.

Figure 45 Real-Time Simulation Dashboard7

Following simulation run, a data analysis tool will be available to display the results of the simulation in a way that the user can easily digest. The user will have the ability to select the AoI in which he is studying and the tool will populate with information relevant only to this KPP. The tool will have the capability to dynamically switch between AoI at the user’s discretion. A mock GUI can be seen in Figure 16.

NOTE: Both GUI mock-ups are for proposal only, and are populated with fake information for the reader’s convenience.

7 Google Earth Application for OS X – White Sands Missile Range, White Sands, NM


Figure 16 Data Analysis Tool GUI


7 Integrated Dictionary (AV-2)

AoI – Area of Interest consists of the current domain of discussion.

COTS – Commercial Off-The-Shelf products are those that can be purchased commercially from distributors without a direct contract with the manufacturer.

EKP – Economic Key Point refers to an infrastructure item that is highly valuable to the holder.

RF – Radio Frequency is a rate of oscillation in the range of about 3 kHz to 300 GHz which corresponds to the frequency of radio waves, and the alternating currents which carry radio signals.8

GAO – Government Accountability Office is a federal government organization responsible for monitoring and verifying how the U.S. Congress allocates taxpayer funds.

ID&PS – Intrusion Detection and Prevention System is a system designed by Team 3 for domestic and foreign military bases in order to mitigate the threat of intrusion.

KPP – Key Performance Parameters are the performance characteristics of a system that are designated as mandatory for customer acceptance of a system.

MP – Military Police

PCRS – Processing Communication & Response System is core of the ID&PS as it allows information to flow freely between human and non-human components. Facilitates swift decision-making based off of the timely delivery of reliable data.

8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_frequency


Documents

Intruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal · Web viewIntruder Detection and Prevention System Project Proposal. 23. 08Fall. 08. Fall. Intruder Detection and Prevention