Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 29
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
No birthdays today

Next birthdays
05/27 Daniel Davis (53)
05/29 Zonalklism (33)
05/29 Dr Hankenstein (67)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: Electromagnetic Radiation
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

ground detecting radar.

1 2 
Move Thread LAN_403
Patrick
Wed Mar 11 2015, 07:53AM Print
Patrick Registered Member #2431 Joined: Tue Oct 13 2009, 09:47PM
Location: Chico, CA. USA
Posts: 5639
Im investigating the use of radar altimetry for my drone, as were supposed to stay below 400 feet AGL. are there particular frequencies of low power that can be used to see "soft" (meaning non-metallic) objects ? (meaning dirt, trees and such) from a mostly directional cone would be desirable. perhaps +/- 15 feet in resolution.

Of course i dont want to use time of flight pico second crap. i geuss itd need to be phase difference type. Is any of this possible, and still light enough to fly? or do i need 12 million $ ... ?
Back to top
Dr. Slack
Wed Mar 11 2015, 09:08AM
Dr. Slack Registered Member #72 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:29AM
Location: UK St. Albans
Posts: 1659
You don't need to use pico second crap, the speed of light in air is 1ns per foot, which means 2ns per foot for a there and back bounce.

With a +/- 15ft tolerance, you could aim for a personal ceiling of 385ft nominal, with +/- 30nS timing resolution.

You need to find a frequency, or a processing regime, that can see the ground but can't see trees, otherwise you may go soaring way over height as you overfly trees.

Chirp frequency difference is probably the easiest to use, as long as your local emissions regulations permit that form of modulation.
Back to top
Sulaiman
Wed Mar 11 2015, 10:38AM
Sulaiman Registered Member #162 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 10:25AM
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3140
an optical range finder may be simpler,
could be as simple as a laser module and the on board camera + some digital processing?

Trees, tall buildings etc. would give false height above ground though.
Back to top
Shrad
Wed Mar 11 2015, 12:43PM
Shrad Registered Member #3215 Joined: Sun Sept 19 2010, 08:42PM
Location:
Posts: 780
can't you do GPS? relying on ground would not be ideal as there are too much material types to discriminate...

if you want to get through trees but still want to bounce on water, that will not be simple either, so I guess the most reliable reference is GPS (and I assume you already have GPS somewhere in your copter)
Back to top
Sulaiman
Wed Mar 11 2015, 02:39PM
Sulaiman Registered Member #162 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 10:25AM
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3140
GPS would only give absolute altitude, or altitude relative to starting position,
if the copter flies over a valley for example, it would be much more than maximum allowed height above ground.

P.S this ruling means that if you want privacy you should live more than 400 ft. above the ground cheesey
Back to top
Ash Small
Wed Mar 11 2015, 02:42PM
Ash Small Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Is the regulation 400 feet above sea level, or 400 feet above the ground?

Where I live, at the top of a hill in a military training area, we have 'copters and jets flying past the windows, and down the valleys at much lower altitudes than 400 feet. Even had a couple of typhoons 'dog fighting' up here the other day, that was LOUD
Back to top
Sulaiman
Wed Mar 11 2015, 02:44PM
Sulaiman Registered Member #162 Joined: Mon Feb 13 2006, 10:25AM
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3140
If you live more than 400 feet above sea level
that ruling would ruin your hobby !

A long time ago I was rock climbing in Wales,
a military jet flew past BELOW me !

I think that the military have their own rules.
Back to top
Dr. Slack
Wed Mar 11 2015, 03:26PM
Dr. Slack Registered Member #72 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 08:29AM
Location: UK St. Albans
Posts: 1659
Shrad wrote ...

can't you do GPS? relying on ground would not be ideal as there are too much material types to discriminate...

if you want to get through trees but still want to bounce on water, that will not be simple either, so I guess the most reliable reference is GPS (and I assume you already have GPS somewhere in your copter)

GPS accuracy is horrible for altitude, something to do with not seeing satellites below ground, which is why most walking GPS thingies also have baro altimeters, then you'll have to reference it to what the local ground elevation is. You can do this by querying a site that gives altitude versus lat/lon, but you'll need a live internet connection to fly.

<edit> Better would be DGPS with respect to a receiver on the ground, perhaps at your launch/control point, as long as the ground level didn't vary too much over the operational area. </edit>
Back to top
radiotech
Mon Mar 16 2015, 07:21AM
radiotech Registered Member #2463 Joined: Wed Nov 11 2009, 03:49AM
Location:
Posts: 1546
Your propellers might be re crafted some how so they make a +1 mach
sonic pulse(s) in sequence and geometrically aimed down. It possibly
could return a timed echo.


wiki
"designed as a ... part of the whip exceeds the speed of sound—thereby creating a small sonic boom"





Back to top
Uspring
Mon Mar 16 2015, 10:08AM
Uspring Registered Member #3988 Joined: Thu Jul 07 2011, 03:25PM
Location:
Posts: 711
Dr. Slack wrote:
GPS accuracy is horrible for altitude, something to do with not seeing satellites below ground...
Sounds plausible. GPS relies on time of flight differences between signals from different satellites. A time of flight difference between 2 signals from 2 satellites above you defines a vertically oriented plane of possible positions. More satellites will define several such planes, whose intersection gives you the current position. Intersections of nearly vertically oriented planes are prone to altitude error if not located precisely. Satellites near the horizon will help, but there might be additional error coming from a long passage of the signal through the atmosphere, since the speed of light depends on its density.
Back to top
1 2 

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.