173 lines
9.9 KiB
Plaintext
173 lines
9.9 KiB
Plaintext
![]() |
HOW TRAFFIC RADAR WORKS
|
||
|
|
||
|
The first thing to understand about traffic radar is that it has almost
|
||
|
nothing in common with the military radar used for civil defense, or the
|
||
|
aviation radar used by air-traffic controllers, or the weather radar used by
|
||
|
the meteorologist on the ten o'clock news. Those sophisticated radars can all
|
||
|
measure speed of objects, distance of those objects from the radar station,
|
||
|
and general shape of those objects to aid in identification by a ground crew.
|
||
|
Those radars also cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Traffic radar, on the other hand, can't be any larger than what will fit on
|
||
|
the dashboard of a mid-size cruiser, and it can't cost any more than the low
|
||
|
bid of your municipality's procurement process. Sometimes this is $400 or
|
||
|
less. So traffic radar is necessarily a device with limited capabilities.
|
||
|
|
||
|
THE CONSTRICTED VIEW
|
||
|
|
||
|
The first limitation restricts the amount of territory traffic radar can
|
||
|
cover. Military-aviation-weather radars use a rotating beam to sweep a full
|
||
|
360 degrees around the antenna tower. All targets within range are displayed
|
||
|
on a radar screen.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Traffic radar uses only a stationary beam, much like a searchlight, and it
|
||
|
shines down the road, either forward or backward, but not both ways at once.
|
||
|
So the area under surveillance by traffic radar is quite limited.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The second limitation of traffic radar concerns the amount of information it
|
||
|
can provide. Traffic radar doesn't have a radar screen. Only a single
|
||
|
digital readout. So, at any given time, the maximum amount of information
|
||
|
traffic radar can provide is one number. This is a very significant
|
||
|
limitation and we'll talk more about it later.
|
||
|
|
||
|
LOOKING FOR TROUBLE
|
||
|
|
||
|
It's reasonable to think of a traffic radar beam as a searchlight because,
|
||
|
even though the beam is made up of microwaves, it behaves very much like a
|
||
|
light beam. It travels in straight lines and is easily reflected. Metallic
|
||
|
objects like cars, trucks, guard rails and over passes make the most effective
|
||
|
reflectors, sending glints of microwaves around in unpredictable directions,
|
||
|
just like glints of light.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Unlike light, however, you can't see this beam because microwaves are
|
||
|
invisible to the human eye. But they are very easily seen by an electronic
|
||
|
eye, in this case a radio tuned to microwave frequency. And, in fact, such a
|
||
|
radio connected to a compact antenna forms the basis of all traffic radars.
|
||
|
|
||
|
HERE'S LOOKING AT YOU, KID
|
||
|
|
||
|
Traffic radar works by shining its microwave searchlight down the road. When
|
||
|
you come in range, the microwave beam bounces off your car, and the radar
|
||
|
antenna looks for the reflections.
|
||
|
|
||
|
How does radar get your speed from these microwave reflections? It used a
|
||
|
phenomenon of physics known as the Doppler principle. We've all heard how the
|
||
|
Doppler principle works with sound waves. The classic example is what you
|
||
|
hear when you stand along the railroad tracks. As the train approaches, you
|
||
|
hear the sound at a fixed pitch. The instant the train passes and begins to
|
||
|
move away, you hear a lower pitch. In fact, the train itself is making the
|
||
|
same sound both coming and going, but to a stationary listener, the speed of
|
||
|
the train adds to the pitch of its sound as it approaches, and subtracts as it
|
||
|
departs. This change from true pitch is called the Doppler Shift and the
|
||
|
magnitude of the change depends only upon the speed of the train.
|
||
|
|
||
|
SCIENCE ON THE GO
|
||
|
|
||
|
Traffic radar applies this Doppler principle to microwaves. The microwave
|
||
|
reflection from an approaching car will be shifted upward in frequency. A
|
||
|
departing car will cause a downward shift. The radar compares the shifted
|
||
|
frequency of the reflection to the original frequency of the beam it sent out,
|
||
|
and from the difference it calculated speed, which it then displays on the
|
||
|
digital readout. Thats really all there is to traffic radar.
|
||
|
|
||
|
A CHEAP BULB IS A DIM BULB
|
||
|
|
||
|
Traffic radar is purposely kept simple. Going back to the searchlight
|
||
|
analogy, we all know there's a limit to the effectiveness of any flashlight or
|
||
|
spotlight. The more powerful it is, the farther you can see. The same
|
||
|
applies to radar. And since power cost money, whether you're speaking of
|
||
|
searchlights or radar a traffic radar will have far less power than expensive
|
||
|
military radar. And traffic radar's range will be limited accordingly. It's
|
||
|
a fact of microwave life that the strength of the beam diminishes with
|
||
|
distance (radio waves in general act this way too (ed)). The father it has to
|
||
|
travel, the less energy it'll have when it gets there. For example, the radar
|
||
|
operator may be able to spray your car with microwaves while you're still a
|
||
|
mile away. But the reflected signal has to travel that same mile back to the
|
||
|
radar before it's of any value, and if it's so weak when it gets back that the
|
||
|
radar's electronics can't read it, then it will be unable to compute speed.
|
||
|
You're out of range.
|
||
|
|
||
|
THE NEARSIGHTED ELECTRONIC EYE
|
||
|
|
||
|
In real life, radar range depends upon two things: power of the radar and the
|
||
|
reflectivity of the target. We've already talked about power. That's built
|
||
|
into the radar and there's nothing you can do about it. Reflectivity of the
|
||
|
target is definitely something you should be aware of, however. Perhaps
|
||
|
you've heard of an Air Force project called the "stealth bomber." This is an
|
||
|
attempt to build an airplane with poor radar reflectivity so it won't bounce
|
||
|
back the microwave beam. Such a bomber operating at its normal altitude would
|
||
|
be invisible to enemy radar. Radar reflectivity is mostly a matter of size
|
||
|
and shape, at least for purposes of describing highway vehicles. The smaller
|
||
|
the vehicle, the smaller its reflection, and therefore the shorter its range.
|
||
|
Some cars are out of range on some radars until they drive within 500 feet of
|
||
|
the antenna. On the other hand big, flat surfaces perpendicular to the beam
|
||
|
make excellent reflectors. The same radar that may be blind to a small car
|
||
|
500 feet away can see a semi a mile and a half away under the right
|
||
|
conditions. So the principle of radar is quite easily understood, but the
|
||
|
quirks of its operation behavior are hard to predict with accuracy.
|
||
|
|
||
|
THE BOTTOM LINE
|
||
|
|
||
|
The one thing you can be absolutely sure of, however, is that traffic radar
|
||
|
can only monitor one target at a time. It has one readout and it displays one
|
||
|
number. Where does it get the number? If there are several cars and trucks in
|
||
|
the beam, as there surely would be on a roadway with even moderate traffic,
|
||
|
how can it give only one number? This, in fact, is the most serious of all of
|
||
|
traffic radar's limitations. Because it's made to a low-bid price, it must
|
||
|
necessarily be a relatively simple device. At least the low power of traffic
|
||
|
radar is an asset here in that it pretty well limits surveillance to line of
|
||
|
sight. And the simplest way of narrowing the field further - down to the
|
||
|
mandatory single number - is to program the electronics to consider only the
|
||
|
strongest reflection. That has been done in all traffic radars.
|
||
|
|
||
|
And it's this one simplification, more than any other factor, that causes
|
||
|
errors. This one simplification introduces the human element. An operator
|
||
|
must look at the one number and decide what or who is responsible for it.
|
||
|
Humans have a tough time keeping track of invisible beams.
|
||
|
|
||
|
BELIEVING WHAT CAN'T BE SEEN
|
||
|
|
||
|
If there is only one vehicle in range, probably that vehicle is responsible
|
||
|
for the number, although it could be caused by an electrical interference or
|
||
|
blowing trash or some other less obvious distraction to the microwaves. If
|
||
|
there is more than one vehicle in range, it's up to the operator to decide
|
||
|
which one is producing the strongest reflection. Is it the closest one to the
|
||
|
antenna, or is the largest one in the pack? In truth, it could be either,
|
||
|
depending upon a host of subtleties. A skilled operator intent on justice
|
||
|
wouldn't write a ticket unless he was absolutely sure. A less skilled
|
||
|
operator might write the ticket thinking he had the right answer, and be
|
||
|
wrong. A careless operator intent on filling his quota might see the number
|
||
|
and single out a likely perpetrator the red sports car - and be done with it.
|
||
|
When you deal with humans you take your chances.
|
||
|
|
||
|
THE PLOT THICKENS
|
||
|
|
||
|
So far, this discussion has been confined to stationary radar, the kind
|
||
|
waiting for you in a trap over the hill or hidden behind a bridge abutment. A
|
||
|
more complex system exists - usually called "moving radar" - which allows an
|
||
|
operator to check the speed of oncoming traffic while the patrol car is in
|
||
|
motion. The priniciples involved are the same as for stationary radar: a
|
||
|
microwave beam looks forward, monitoring the strongest reflection, which in
|
||
|
this case is the oncoming terrain. Simultaneously the beam monitors the
|
||
|
second strongest reflection, which it takes to be oncoming traffic. An
|
||
|
internal calculator then subtracts the terrain speed (same as patrol car
|
||
|
speed) from the closing speed of the patrol car and the oncoming traffic. The
|
||
|
result - again, displayed as a single number - should be the road speed of the
|
||
|
target vehicle.
|
||
|
|
||
|
A FALSE WITNESS
|
||
|
|
||
|
Should be, but frequently isn't. Unquestionably, military engineers could
|
||
|
design a moving radar that would deliver accuracy every time. But on traffic
|
||
|
control budgets, no one has figured a way to eliminate all of the mistakes.
|
||
|
For example, moving radar frequently underestimates patrol car speed because
|
||
|
of "cosine error" with the result that the speed of the target car is
|
||
|
substantially overestimated. So Well knows is this and other errors that in
|
||
|
some states, like Wisconsin, the courts do not take "judicial notice" of
|
||
|
moving radar, which is to say that radar evidence alone is not considered
|
||
|
persuasive. The point to remember is that radar is a very sophisticated
|
||
|
electronic concept, a system of proven effectiveness, but traffic radar has
|
||
|
limitations that can't be ignored. The best way to defend yourself is to have
|
||
|
a good working knowledge of these limitations.
|
||
|
|