DIY Synthetic Aperture Radar 118
An anonymous reader lets us know about a DIY synthetic aperture radar built for $240 in parts (give or take). Here's PDF slideware from the Ph.D. student's research. "Using a discarded garage door opener, an old cordless drill, and a collection of surplus microwave parts, a high resolution X-band linear rail synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imaging system was developed for approximately $240 material cost. Entry into the field of radar cross section measurements or SAR algorithm development is often difficult due to the cost of high-end precision pulsed IF or other precision radar test instruments."
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Aperture Science (Score:4, Funny)
My god, it's like it's 2004 [xkcd.com] again!
No, the AC is just a Mac user who finally got to play Portal when he downloaded Steam.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And he threw a fit when he discovered the need to right-click.
Not that one again. At the risk of being repetitious: Macs have supported a three-button mouse for at least the last ten years and have shipped with them for at least five. Even before that, there was generally an alternative involving pressing one of the meta keys when making a mouse click.
Re: (Score:1)
And he threw a fit when he discovered the need to right-click.
Not that one again. At the risk of being repetitious: Macs have supported a three-button mouse for at least the last ten years and have shipped with them for at least five. Even before that, there was generally an alternative involving pressing one of the meta keys when making a mouse click.
So when do they start shipping with sense of humour implants?
(Now I have to preview / submit before my machine BSODs)
---
If you think you've spotted a spelling mistake,
we probably live on different continents
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
It's okay. The sequel is coming out soon.
Portal jokes will once again become relevant in 3... 2... ::static::
Re: (Score:2)
I sometimes wonder if xkcd doesn't actually have a home page and that it just uses Slashdot comments as an index.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
More like "Because we can".
Re: (Score:2)
Crooks (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm part of a team who did something similar (We're presenting it at IEEE MWSCAS, it's much less cool than this, though). We built several thousands of dollars worth of test equipment using cheap junk and came out with stuff that was just as good. DIY folks have been doing this for decades, of course, but PhD students are now starting to publish these things. This is a big deal, and means that legitimate researchers can pick up this work and very easily enter a field of research their institutions may have previously been unable to fund. Our school has always just enlisted students to design and build all of our test equipment, but still. This is good.
I didn't RTFA, but I certainly hope they've open-sourced their backend interface software and hardware designs as well. Of course, if you're disassembling a microwave, you can hardly patent the technology. Closing off access to your work kind of defeats the purpose in science, though.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup, definitely sounds like something crooks would do.
Wait, what am I missing?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Crooks (Score:5, Insightful)
What's your point? The grocery store wants to sell me a red pepper for $2 that I could grow for a few cents. That doesn't make them crooks, it's just the nature of capitalism and value add. Raising your own produce is only cheap if you know how to do it, have the space to do it, and are willing to put in the time to do so. And if your time is free. The free market also provides other options - I can get them cheaper at the farmers' market, but only during certain portions of the year and only if I'm willing to shop at specific times. It's all about tradeoffs and what people are willing to pay for.
The crooks are the people who charge $10,000 for something you can build in your garage for $50.
Most people can't build anything of the kind for any amount of money. How many people do you think know how to solder? The reason why this guy was able to build this for $240 is because he has a $150,000+ education, is far above average, and has access to the tools needed to make this.
Are you proposing that you get paid minimum wage once you graduate because students are willing to work for free or cheap on projects? Or do you expect to get paid enough to live above a student quality lifestyle, pay back student loans, support a family, etc.? Are you advocating for communism?
Does your $50 test equipment have a warranty? Support? Certification? Documentation? Insurance covering damages if it should short out and burn down the lab? Can a replacement be overnighted from the factory if need be? Are you factoring in the fact that your university is subsidized by research grants, donors, and possibly the government (if it's a public school) which distorts true costs? Are your scavenged parts going to be reliable? Are you providing health insurance for the people building the gear? Unemployment insurance? FICA? Paying rent on the facility? Allowing for a middle salesman who'll be vital to getting your product into customers' hands?
The basic fact of capitalism is that you price your product and/or service as high as you think the market will pay. Unless there's a monopoly, either you've priced yourself appropriately or someone will undercut you and you'll have to lower your prices or go out of business. There's nothing wrong with aiming for the high end of a market. If you can double your prices and still get half of your business, you're doing less work for the same money. Of course, your customers might not be very loyal as a result.
If you think that the test equipment is overpriced, once you graduate, find some investors and start your own company with better pricing. But I'd recommend taking a few business classes first. Even if you got your parts, tools, shipping, and rent for free (and paid no taxes), you'd still have to make and sell 4 or 5 pieces of test equipment at $50/each every week just to pay yourself minimum wage.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, capitalism is nice for paying the rent and all, but it's still contrary to the nature of the pursuit of knowledge. I'm just saying that the spirit of open source is spreading in a meaningful way into more facets of academia than software, and that's a good thing.
Additionally, I'm not starting a business and selling this crap for $50. I'm making it so that anyone who wants this equipment can easily assign some undergrad to toss it together over a weekend. I don't see why it should cost an arm and a leg
Re: (Score:2)
You go on and on about capitalism and the free market but the basic fact of the matter is that there are so few people demanding these devices and so few companies selling them that the rules theorised for grain and bullion markets simply do not apply. There is enormous price gouring and manipulation going on by companies who have cornered these so called "markets", which are in reality simply landlord/tenant relationships without the corresponding protections.
These devices cost less to make than a DVD play
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The same "rules theorised for grain and bullion markets" still apply. The variables are just different though. In grain, you get a lot for a little work as nature provides most of the investment. With these devices, you get little for a lot of work (comparatively). Gain then has to be stored somewhere and processed special in order to remain usable for it's intended purpose. In both, your markup has to be income that lasts a good portion of the year when grain can't be harvested-sold. If you spend income or
Re: (Score:2)
These devices cost less to make than a DVD player, yet are being sold for a thousand times the price.
Except that's not the case at all. The commercial radar you buy for your aircraft, your naval destroyer, etc is not some cheap POS garage door opener bought out of a yard sale and hacked up by some geek. It goes without saying that the design for a commercial radar is completely different, the construction is different, everything is different--and much more complex--than some crap you might hack together fo
Re: (Score:2)
Does your $50 test equipment have a warranty? Support? Certification? Documentation? Insurance covering damages if it should short out and burn down the lab? Can a replacement be overnighted from the factory if need be? Are you factoring in the fact that your university is subsidized by research grants, donors, and possibly the government (if it's a public school) which distorts true costs? Are your scavenged parts going to be reliable? Are you providing health insurance for the people building the gear? Un
Re: (Score:2)
People pay $10k for a $50 widget because of the time needed to certify that the $50 dollar item was built correctly and works as intended. You can try to sell me the $50 item, but if my manufacturing process needs things like a calibration certificate traceable to a NIST standard, then I'm going to buy the $10k item, deliver on time and charge the customer. I don't have time to certify that the device operates as intended (which requires time and a whole other set of equipment). Customers are much more inte
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, no, people pay $10k because companies ask for that. And companies ask for that not because of the certification crap, but because it's not mass produced. Any microprocessor today has more R&D, testing, certification and all you can name, but it doesn't sell for $10k. On the other hand, test instruments (for example) don't have such a huge market (like a microwave frequency generator, or a 50GHz scope, or even a 300A regulated power suply). So when you divide all the cost (especially human - those sc
DIY == Ph.D.? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:DIY == Ph.D.? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is. The only way to starve a troll is to ignore it. Any attention, positive or negative, is food.
You should probably go take a refresher course. It seems you've lost some of the fundamentals.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
:)
You should know better! Trolls are like hydras, only retarded (in the bad way) heh.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:DIY == Ph.D.? (Score:4, Insightful)
I would think most of the great Ph.D.'s would be DIY, else what's the point? Your thesis is supposed to be original research, and serious research at that, so I don't see how coming up with a way of building extremely expensive technology at a tiny fraction of the cost in your garage is anything but exactly what a Ph.D. thesis is all about.
It's not a book report or high school research paper, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a reasonable response. I think you would find many PH.D.'s - at least in the sciences, I won't venture to comment on the arts or fine arts - are entirely theoretical which I hope you would agree are not DIY - at least not DIY in the colloquial sense as I understand it. On your assertion that there is no point if it isn't DIY let me say that if it had been a thesis E=MC**2 would not be DIY, but I hope you agree there would be a point to it.
Well, I've been working on an idea for a while (Score:2)
That could use stuff like this. I have been working with a group of British archaeologists at the Mellor Archaeological Trust for a few years and they have a superb site - but much of it is either impossible to excavate or too expensive. So they started working with Ground Penetrating Radar. Interesting novelty toy, but it only tells you where it might be interesting to dig, it doesn't really help avoid digging.
At the SC2005 supercomputer show, I saw demonstrated reverse tomography techniques. Ah, this look
Re: (Score:2)
IEEE MWSCAS
www.bitboost.com/pawsense/
Glad I could help. :)
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, you calibrated it against known standards so you know that for certain. (Calibration is what makes the difference between cheap junk and useful equipment.)
Yes, it's a big deal. DIY grad students, PhD candidates, etc... have been c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It represents the distinction between every student having to reinvent the wheel for every project, and future students being able to build more complex testing equipment by combining together others' works.
Saying this is bad can be liken to decrying scientists for standing on the shoulders of giants.
Stop Him Now (Score:5, Funny)
This could fall into the hands of terrorists.
Citizens are consumers. We are passing Intellectual Property laws, to ensure that they remain so, and do not make the mistake of becoming producers.
This man's brilliance sets another difficult example and precedent, which will be hard to contain or dismiss! I suggest a patent law-suit against him, and a criminal charges based on illegal production of weaponizable technology.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This could fall into the hands of terrorists.
Anything could fall into the hands of terrorists. This sort of statement is paranoia at its best.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
This sort of statement is paranoia at its best.
And sarcasm.
Re: (Score:2)
It's really sad that you were marked "insightful" instead of "funny".
Is satire dead in this country?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that was pretty interesting as well, doing before and after scans after body and paint mods might be very popular in areas where the police use radar instead of laser for speed measurement. It occured to me that graphite absorbs microwaves very well [sciencedirect.com], and might be used as a paint pigment, and be toning down the highly reflective areas by changing the shape before painting a car might be almost invisible to radar..
Re: (Score:2)
Wave Motion Gun? (Score:2, Interesting)
Can you mount this on your car? Maybe torch the guy who cut you off in traffic?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course!
Though... there is a problem of getting them to stay on the rotating turntable.
Re: (Score:1)
That comforting green glow (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
After years of monitoring postings across the net I have finally found you. I knew the internet would be your weakness, and you would slip up. Now, I will hunt down your ip address and finally bring some small measure of justice to this world.
--Thunderbolt Ross
Re: (Score:1)
Which part did you find strange?
Old? (Score:2, Informative)
This seems to be from 2006/7...
Re: (Score:2)
If this is your only news source, it's always new!
Well, unless it's a dupe...
here it comes... (Score:2)
Re:Old? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Why am I here?
Because even with stale topics to talk about, GNAA nonsense and completely offtopic rants, the comments here are an order of magnitude better than any other news site out there.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot more than 240 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:A lot more than 240 (Score:4, Informative)
$150 to $450 on EBay, but still your point is valid.
The point isn't the specific price (Score:3, Interesting)
$150 to $450 on EBay, but still your point is valid.
Even if it is $700, his point still doesn't invalidate the researcher's point: technology which the conventional wisdom holds is only available to organizations with large budgets is actually available at what are essentially middle-class consumer prices.
The point isn't that you can do it for precisely $500 or $700 or $1200 or $2000 or $5000. The point is if you know someone with reasonable engineering skills and you can raise a few thousand bucks, you can
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The point is if you know someone with reasonable engineering skills and you can raise a few thousand bucks, you can build this stuff.
If nothing else, this has significant ramifications for asymmetric military conflicts...
Something tells me that those "asymmetric military conflicts" are such because they don't have anyone with reasonable engineering skills - what they do have is people who can follow instructions to make stuff, and people who can find instructions for said stuff.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not counting computer, Windows, Labview and Matlab.
If anything, someone concerned with the cost would try to exclude the last two, as they alone make it more expensive than "high-cost" radars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Someone in a university usually can just get a radar from the university. That doesn't mean, he can proclaim that he invented a zero-cost radar.
Re: (Score:2)
Not counting computer, Windows, Labview and Matlab.
If anything, someone concerned with the cost would try to exclude the last two, as they alone make it more expensive than "high-cost" radars.
Replace Windows with Linux, and Matlab with Octave. There's probably a FOSS alternative for Labview as well. It's fairly safe to say that most people have access to a computer (presumably also how they got access to these instructions), especially since he didn't specify what kind of hardware you'd need to run this - an decade old PC would probably be more than enough.
Re: (Score:2)
True, however this is what the author of this "low-cost radar" did not do, and apparently didn't even consider doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone with a decent sound card in their PC already has a better DAQ rig.
"GOSTATE in pushpins" (Score:2)
I would have RTFA (Score:1)
$240 for them, but not for me (Score:3, Informative)
That total cost of 240$ is based on them acquiring used material at a radio swap meet, not scavenging it from old stuff I could find in my attic, and definitely no buying from some online supplier. That is, w/o a lot of luck, time, and knowledge- there is no way I could duplicate this effort with ease.
Re: (Score:2)
That total cost of 240$ is based on them acquiring used material at a radio swap meet, not scavenging it from old stuff I could find in my attic, and definitely no buying from some online supplier. That is, w/o a lot of luck, time, and knowledge- there is no way I could duplicate this effort with ease.
Agreed. This is $240 only if you happen to have thousands of dollars worth of the right junk and test equipment lying around.
Re: (Score:2)
SAR is really cool (Score:2, Interesting)
I worked for a company started by a person who did SAR research in school. His project was based off an earlier one done by my current business partner at the time. A small rail track is still mounted on top of the engineering building at the university from these projects.
The big difference with what that company, www.ImSAR.com, is doing and anyone else is the size. The system they developed is 2lbs and smaller than a shoebox. At the time, the next smallest system was 50 lbs. This little box can fly a a p
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Found it: http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardware/winner-radio-eye-in-the-sky
Old stuff (Score:1, Interesting)
I did this exact thing in 1984 in grad school for MSEE. Only it didn't require quite as much hardware as he used.
At the time it was hush-hush because it was for Air Force to use on new bomber construction - B1 with stealth-like attributes.
Cost more too. May have to revisit now that can find cheap parts.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah radars are old news... more like 1940 news. I don't see what is the big deal about this.
Ho-Hum (Score:1)
Got all the microwave parts at hamfests? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm impressed with what this guy found at a hamfest. We don't see much microwave gear in Silicon Valley surplus any more. eBay, though, has a decent selection of microwave horns, low noise amplifiers, mixers, and waveguide. It looks like anybody could get the necessary parts in small quantity. New, though, those parts are expensive, so building low-cost robot vision systems this way is hard.
Also, when your "garage machine shop" has a Bridgeport milling machine, you're way above the usual home shop level. Still, if there's a TechShop in your town, you can get access to such machines.
A big problem working in this area, even if you know what you're doing, is that the test gear you need costs more than the thing you're making. Reading the design notes, some of which are on Air Force Research Lab stationery, indicate that the hamfest parts were tested and characterized using reasonably good test gear. And this was an MIT student, with access to MIT labs.
I ran into that building a small LIDAR in the early 1990s. The parts cost wasn't too bad, but I needed access to about $20K in test gear to debug the thing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
However, I will admit that this is certainly beyond the capabilities of most people due to the lack test equipment that is needed to even test the parts found at the swap meet.
True. Although it is easier to get gigahertz test gear than it used to be, the typical 'scope won't go there. [tek.com]
Cool Technology, but ... (Score:1, Interesting)
It's still amazing a humble little bat accomplishes essentially the same thing except with sound, especially given the computational resources fourier transformations require.