Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Hardware Hacking Build

Radar Expert Explains How To Cheaply Add Radar To Your Own Hardware Projects 69

szczys writes "Gregory Charvat has been playing with and teaching others about entry-level radar concepts for a long time. Now he's sat down and explained how you can do it yourself inexpensively. He says, 'One enabling technology for Radar was the cathode ray tube (CRT), which facilitated a method of measuring the time delay between transmitted and received waveforms. ... Today, rather than using a CRT we can use high-speed digitizers. This offers the obvious advantage of applying signal processing to acquired data so that only moving targets are detected, tracking can be achieved, imaging, and a multitude of other modes. But for hobbyist and consumer projects we do not need this much power, range, and can not afford the cost. We need the ability to sense like a long range radar (detecting only moving targets, imaging, Doppler, signatures, etc) but at short ranges and at low costs.' Charvat then proceeds to walk through several options for the amatuer hardware hacker."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Radar Expert Explains How To Cheaply Add Radar To Your Own Hardware Projects

Comments Filter:
  • Re:My interest (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anrego ( 830717 ) * on Tuesday February 25, 2014 @07:26PM (#46340185)

    Dunno about where you live, but around here, police use LIDAR which is much more difficult to deal with for the would be detector/jammer.

    LIDAR is pretty much impossible to detect until it's pointing right at you, at which point the best you can do is try to jam it long enough to slow down (which is pretty damn obvious when the cops LIDAR gun goes nuts as soon as he points it at your car).

  • by mpoulton ( 689851 ) on Tuesday February 25, 2014 @07:35PM (#46340249)
    The new single-chip radar solutions and FMCW radar modules are definitely much easier to use and more capable than what was available just a few years ago, but DIY radar is nothing new. Amateur radio operators have been playing with radar guns and door sensors for decades, and doing some pretty interesting things with them. I remember reading photocopies of articles from QST from the 1970's that explained how to hack door sensors to make speed detectors, as well as using them for long-distance voice and video transmission with parabolic reflectors. People have also been playing with marine radar, which is considerably more expensive but still affordable for a dedicated experimenter.
  • Re:My interest (Score:5, Interesting)

    by morethanapapercert ( 749527 ) on Tuesday February 25, 2014 @10:06PM (#46341521) Homepage
    There are several companies which market license plate covers designed to obscure your plate when targeted by certain technologies. Polarized covers to defeat roadside speed cameras, prismatic covers to defeat overhead cameras from toll roads and so on.

    Problem is; most places in North America and I imagine Europe as well, already have laws on the books covering illegible or obscured registration tags and these covers often fall on the wrong side of the law. Personally, I'd rather get the speeding ticket than a missing/illegible plate ticket and would really really like to avoid any possible "obstruction of a police officer in the performance of his duties" charge.

    Something else to consider; based on what seems to be the growing trend in the US: Do you want to get a speeding ticket which usually isn't a criminal act and only nets you a fine Or do you want to use a device whose (arguably) sole purpose is to break the law with impunity, leading to your car being declared as property used in the commission of a crime and confiscated? (while you get beaten half to death and charged with resisting arrest) If you speed, you are only in violation when you speed, but if you put a contraband plate cover on, you are in violation just parked on the street

"If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong." -- Norm Schryer