Lab testing of new seismic sensor for defense and security applications

Pakhomov, Alex; Sicignano, Albert; Goldburt, Tim

doi:10.1117/12.581376

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The land case installed GSS-EBS shows a much better response to low and high frequency signals than either the GS-14-L3 or GS-20DX geophones. As in the testing without land cases [1], the GSS-EBS performs better than the GS-14-L3 below 20-24Hz and above 40Hz frequencies and better than the GS-20DX geophone below 10-12Hz and above 50Hz frequencies. Note that the spectral responses of both the GS-14-L3 and GS-20DX geophones are in accordance with the manufacturer's data for these geophones [4].…”

Section: Final Lab Testing Of New Sensormentioning

confidence: 71%

“…GSS's proprietary micro-electromechanical (MEM) node of the sensor was described in full in [1,3]. A picture of the GSS sensor with a middle replaceable mass, which was used during testing, is shown in Figure 1.…”

Section: Micro-electromechanical (Mem) Node and Electronic Circuitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous papers [1,3], we reported the design and the pilot lab test results of the new GSS sensor (GSS-EBS). During the pilot lab testing we compared the new sensor with the most popular geophones (GS-14-L3 and GS-20DX) produced by Geo Space Corporation or by other companies that use GSC's patents.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Testing of new seismic sensors for footstep detection and other security applications

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General Sensing Systems (GSS) has been successfully developing a new sensor for the past several years. Herein we describe the lab and field testing of this small size, extremely lost cost and high performance seismic sensor intended for up-to-date security and military systems. This article delivers the latest results of the wide-ranging laboratory and field tests of this new sensor. During the testing, GSS's new sensor was compared with the leading commercially available geophones, the GS-14-L3 and GS-20DX geophones produced by Geo Space Corporation. The obtained results confirm our pilot lab testing [1] in terms of the advantages of new sensor. The results show that the new GSS sensor has an expanding frequency response range in both the low and high frequency areas. The GSS sensor also has the highest sensitivity among all the compared geophones as well as a lower sensitivity threshold. This point is significant for real signal interpretation in heavy noise environments and is a significant advantage of the GSS sensor's performance in comparison to that of existing commercial geophones. The comparative field test results show that the GSS sensor allows to detect footstep signal by almost 3 times larger distance between the sensor and walking person. This is crucial for increased detection range of seismic-acoustic reconnaissance systems. In general, the results show it is possible to manufacture very small and inexpensive seismic sensors with significantly improved performance characteristics.

show abstract

Section: Final Lab Testing Of New Sensormentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Micro-electromechanical (Mem) Node and Electronic Circuitmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing of new seismic sensors for footstep detection and other security applications

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sensor comparisons implementing ANOVA exist in a variety of fields [9], [10], [15], [17], [18], and [22]. For example, if sensor responses are represented as a single variable, analysis of variance (ANOVA) computations can be performed to demonstrate variance within the batch given a suitable number of replications [11].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Performance is typically measured by comparing a sensor's response to a known control response in terms of the sensor's frequency, magnitude, and impulse response and an excepted tolerance for deviation from the ideal specified response. There are many recognized techniques for these kinds of evaluations [4], [9], [12], [21], and [22]. Qualitative analysis is frequently implemented in industry to present and understand the unit-to-unit variance due to sensor manufacturing processes, especially in cases where it is not always practical to obtain or consistently derive a true calibration response for comparison.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ensemble Sensor Inspection: ANOVA With Several-Independent Univariate Tests

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The manufacturing of a batch of commercially available passive seismoacoustic sensors to be used concurrently in an array format requires a procedure for the determination of performance. Performance is typically measured by comparing each individual's sensor's response to a known control response. Unfortunately, as is the case with the sensors used in this analysis, it is not always practical to obtain or consistently derive a response for comparison. The method described can be applied to a variety of situations where sensor-to-sensor variation is of importance within the array and the sensor produces a multivariate measurement.

show abstract

Magnetophoresis and Electret‐Mediated Transdermal Delivery of Drugs

Maurya

Murthy

2015

Novel Delivery Systems for Transdermal and Intradermal Drug Delivery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lab testing of new seismic sensor for defense and security applications

Cited by 10 publications

References 3 publications

Testing of new seismic sensors for footstep detection and other security applications

Testing of new seismic sensors for footstep detection and other security applications

Ensemble Sensor Inspection: ANOVA With Several-Independent Univariate Tests

Magnetophoresis and Electret‐Mediated Transdermal Delivery of Drugs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About