Augmentation of IMS Infrasound Arrays for Near-field
Clutter Reduction
Curt A. L. Szuberla, John V. Olson and Kenneth M. Arnoult, Jr.
Wilson Infrasound ObservatoriesGeophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks
Presented at the Infrasound Technology WorkshopHamilton Parish, Bermuda 5 November 2008
This presentation does not necessarily reflect the policies or views of the United States Government.
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 2
AbstractThe analysis of data recorded at IMS infrasound arrays is
complicated by the presence of near-field clutter, both from anthropogenic and geophysical sources. Ideally, the IDC would like to exclude events that arise from within ~100 km of an array from its analysis pipelines. Previous work by our group made use of a signal processing technique to identify signal sources arising from within about ~20 km of a single IMS array, using only that array for the identification. Subsequently, we have explored the use of several, small arrays for precise localization of infrasound sources. This work has begun to be extended to the augmentation of an existing IMS array in an effort to push that near-field identification zone farther out. We present an introduction to this work and preliminary results of numerical simulations.
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 3
The IMS Infrasound Problem
▫ Principal IMS task: record far-field events ≥ 1kT
▫ Infrasound stations operate in noise:natural & manmade
▫Ubiquitous near-field sources:high spatiotemporal coherence
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 4
The IMS Infrasound Problem
▫Too many signals
excessive false alarms
▫Raise detection threshold
missed event
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 5
The IMS Infrasound Problem
▫Too many signals
excessive false alarms
▫Raise detection threshold
missed event
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 6
The IMS Infrasound Problem
▫Too many signals
excessive false alarms
▫Raise detection threshold
missed event
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 7
The IMS Infrasound Problem
▫Too many signals
excessive false alarms
▫Raise detection threshold
missed event
▫Develop a near-field discriminant
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 8
▫Near-field discriminant
▫Precise geolocation via TDOA▫ITW 2005 Tahiti (single arrays)
▫ITW 2006 Fairbanks (meta-arrays)
▫ELVIS 2007
Previous Work
Szuberla & Olson, JASA, 115(1), 2004
Szuberla, et al., JASA-EL, 120(3), 2006
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 9
TDOA: Eases Constraints
▫Amplitude independent
no r -1 problems (vegetation & terrain)
▫Functional form of signal
need only spatiotemporal correlation
▫Efficient linear algebraic calculations
▫Robust estimation via simple pre-processing (model tolerant)
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 10†US Patent Pending
Geolocation Primer
▫Conventional geolocation (BAZ)▫Data fusion
▫Multiple arrays & back azimuths
▫UAF technique (srcLoc)†
▫TDOA approach
▫Single meta-array
▫Predicted performance gain
▫Simple, albeit unrealistic, model
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 11
BAZ (plane wave)
sensors
source
y
x
Back Azimuth ,vt
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 12
BAZ simulation
180 m
40 m
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 13
srcLoc (spacetime approach)
t arrivals
source
sensors
yx
Localization: r, ,vt
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 14
BAZ vs. srcLoc simulation
19 m 3 m
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 15
ELVIS Experiment
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 16
Normalized ELVIS Results
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 17
Near-field Discrimination II
▫ Precise localization is attainable▫ srcLoc
▫discrete, distended arrays (meta-array)
▫Limitations▫ source distance
▫meta-aperture
▫Why not augment an IMS array ▫ imprecise localization
▫upper bound effective discriminant
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 18
Numerical Augmentation
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 19
Numerical Augmentation
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 20
Numerical Augmentation
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 21
Discriminant Effectiveness
3-km
5-km
Array Augmentation • ITW 2008 22
Future Work
▫Numerical work at UAF
▫Atmospheric modeling at UM
▫Fieldwork & validation▫UM research array(s)
▫UAF IMS array(s)
▫Determine correlation standoff limit
▫Refine model assumptions