WO2007117579A1

WO2007117579A1 - Distributed perimeter security threat evaluation

Info

Publication number: WO2007117579A1
Application number: PCT/US2007/008545
Authority: WO
Inventors: Alan T. Doyle; Alan C. Hay
Original assignee: Allison Systems Inc
Current assignee: Allison Systems Inc
Priority date: 2006-04-06
Filing date: 2007-04-06
Publication date: 2007-10-18
Anticipated expiration: 2008-10-06

Abstract

A security system comprises a barrier (160), a sensor system (171, 172, 173), and a control system (110). The sensor system is coupled to the barrier and is configured to receive a plurality of event signals for an event, process the plurality of event signals to determine if the event is a threat, responsive to determining that the event is a threat generate and transmit a threat message identifying the event. The control system is configured to receive and process the threat message to determine a response to the event.

Description

DISTRIBUTED PERIMETER SECURITY THREAT EVALUATION

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The field of the invention relates to perimeter security networks, and in particular, to processing event signals to evaluate threat events.

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART

Recently, many enterprises have become increasingly concerned with the issue of perimeter security. For example, military, municipal, and corporate enterprises desire to secure the perimeters of a wide variety of installations, such as airports, military bases, and corporate campuses.

Typically, perimeter security systems are arranged with multiple sensors arrayed along a boundary and in communication with a central control system. Often times, the sensors are mounted on a barrier, such a fence. In general, the sensors monitor the boundary for event signals, such as vibration and heat signals. Upon sensing an event signal, an alert signal is communicated from the sensors to a central control system.

In one example, the central control system alerts personnel to the occurrence of the event. The personnel are then tasked with investigating the event to evaluate whether or not the event is a security threat. One problem associated with this approach is that dispatching personnel to investigate non-threatening events wastes time and resources.

In a prior art solution to the problem of dispatching personnel to evaluate events, threat evaluation is performed at the central control system. In this manner, personnel will only be dispatched once an accurate threat evaluation has been performed by the central control system. However, threat evaluation processes often times lack accuracy. For example, a single faulty sensor could generate false data, thereby causing the central control system to generate a false alarm. In addition, many modern large scale perimeter security systems include thousands of sensors. In such an environment, the resources required to perform comprehensive threat evaluation are prohibitive. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The same reference number represents the same element on all drawings.

FlG. 1 illustrates a perimeter security network in an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 2 illustrates a barrier system in an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 3 illustrates the operation of a sensor system in an embodiment of the invention.

FlG. 4 illustrates a perimeter security network in an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 5 illustrates a barrier system in an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 6 illustrates the operation of a sensor system in an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 7 illustrates a sensor system in an embodiment of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

FIGS. 1-7 and the following description depict specific embodiments of the invention to teach those skilled in the art how to make and use the best mode of the invention. For the purpose of teaching inventive principles, some conventional aspects have been simplified or omitted. Those skilled in lhc art will appreciate variations from these embodiments that fall within the scope of the invention. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the features described below can be combined in various ways to form multiple embodiments of the invention. As a result, the invention is not limited to the specific embodiments described below, but only by the claims and their equivalents.

First Embodiment Configuration and Operation - FIGS. 1-3

FIG. 1 illustrates perimeter security network 100 in an embodiment of the invention. Perimeter security network 100 includes control system 110, user interface system (UIS) 120, barrier 160, and barrier 180. Barrier 160 includes barrier segments 161, 162, and 163. Barrier 180 includes barrier segments 181 and 182. Sensor systems 171, 172, and 173 are coupled to barrier segments 161 , 162, and 163 respectively. Sensor systems 191 and 192 are coupled to barrier segments 191 and 192 respectively. Sensor systems 171 , 172, and 173 are in communication with control system 110 over communication link 141. Sensor systems 191 and 192 are in communication with control system 110 over communication link 142. It should be understood that, while illustrated as separate communication links, communication links 141 and 142 could comprise a single communication link. Sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192 could be any sensor systems capable of performing remote threat evaluation of event signals generated by potential threat events. In an example, sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192 could be capable of receiving event signals for events, processing the event signals to determine whether or not the events are threats to a perimeter, and communicating with control system 110 over communication links 141 and 142 if the events are threats.

Control system 110 could be any system or collection of systems capable of communicating with sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192 and UIS 120. In an example, control system 110 could be capable of receiving threat messages from sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192 identifying threats and processing the threat messages to determine responses Io the threats. For example, control system 1 10 could provide notification to UIS 120 of a threat, whereby UIS 120 could display the threat notification to a user. In another example, control system 110 could log threat messages for later security analysis.

UIS 120 could be any system capable of communicating with control system 110 and interfacing with a user. UTS 120 could be any type of device capable of interfacing to a user, such as a personal computer, work station, mobile work station, handheld device, phone, or pager, as well as other types of devices.

FIG. 2 illustrates barrier system 200. Barrier system 200 includes barrier segment 201 , sensor system 202, and event 203 in an embodiment of the invention. Barrier segment 201 could be representative of barrier segments 161-163 and 181-182 as illustrated in FIG. 1. Sensor system 202 could be representative of sensor systems 171-173 and 191 -192 as illustrated in FIG. 1.

It should be understood sensor system 202 could be coupled to barrier segment 201 in a manner well known in the art. As illustrated in FIG. 2, event 203 could cause an event signal to be generated on barrier segment 201. For example, event 203 could represent a weather force, such as wind, rain, or hail. The resulting vibration or acceleration of barrier segment 201 due to a weather force could be detectable by sensor system 202.

FIG. 3 illustrates a process describing the operation of sensor system 202 in an embodiment of the invention. The process illustrated in FIG. 3 could be representative of the operation of sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192. To begin, sensor system.202 receives a signal for an event (Step 301 ). For example, sensor system 202 could detect a vibration or acceleration in barrier segment 201. Next, sensor system 202 processes the signal to determine whether or not the event is a threat (Step 302). Upon determining that the event is a threat, sensor system 202 generates and transmits a threat message identifying the event (Step 303).

In an example, the event signal processed by sensor system 202 could indicate a pattern. It should be understood that sensor system 202 could determine whether the event is a threat based on the pattern contained in the signal. For instance, signal patterns caused by weather factors, such as wind or rain, could differ significantly from signal patterns caused by a person attempting to climb barrier segment 201. Sensor system 202 could compare, contrast, or otherwise process the event signal to discriminate between non-threat events, such as wind or rain, and threat events, such as intruders scaling a fence.

In an operational example, a perimeter security system could comprise multiple sensor systems arrayed along a perimeter, such as a border, boundary, or the like. The sensor systems could be coupled to a barrier, such a fence or a wall. For instance, the sensor systems could be mounted to a fence. Optionally, the sensor systems could be independent from a barrier, such as in the case of a video camera or infra-red sensor positioned distant from the perimeter, but directed to the perimeter. The sensor systems could be in communication with a central control system over a communication link. The communication link could be a wired or wireless communication link, or any combination thereof. An example of a wired communication link is an RS-485 link. The control system could be coupled to a user interface system, such as a work station. Personnel could monitor the user interface system for threat events occurring at the perimeter.

In operation, events will typically occur in a continuous fashion at the perimeter. For instance, in a case wherein a fence is positioned along a perimeter, weather, animal, or other environmental events will cause disturbances along the fence. For example, wind gusts could cause a disturbance to the fence. Likewise, small animals could disturb the fence, such as in the case of birds or other small animals climbing or resting on the fence. Such environmental events could be considered non-threat events. Further in operation, events could occur that are not in accordance with non- threat events. Such non-environmental events could be considered threat events. For example, an intruder could attempt to enter the perimeter, such as by climbing a fence. In another example, an intruder could attempt to cut a fence. Regardless of the type of event, a sensor system could detect, sense, measure, or otherwise receive signals created by an event. For example, disturbances translated to a fence by a threat or non-threat event could be measured in terms of vibration or acceleration, as well as by other factors.

In the prior art, a sensor system could transmit data corresponding to the event signals to a central control system for threat evaluation. In contrast, the present embodiment provides for evaluating data corresponding to the event signals at the sensor system. Upon receiving an event signal, the signal is converted to data in a digital form. The data is processed in the sensor system to determine whether the data contains a pattern consistent with non-threat environmental factors, such as wind, or consistent with threats, such as an intruder scaling a fence.

The evaluation result can then be provided to the central control system. The central control system can further provide the result to the user interface system. It should be understood that the central control system could optionally be combined with the user interface system in a single system.

Second Embodiment Configuration and Operation - FIGS. 4-6

FIG. 4 illustrates perimeter security network 400 in an embodiment of the invention. Perimeter security network 400 includes control system 410, user interface system (UlS) 420, mobile UIS 430, barrier 460, barrier 480, and weather station 435. Barrier 460 includes barrier segments 461, 462, and 463. Barrier 480 includes barrier segments 481 and 482. Sensor systems 471, 472, and 473 are coupled to barrier segments 461, 462, and 463 respectively. Sensor systems 491 and 492 are coupled to barrier segments 491 and 492 respectively. Sensor systems 471, 472, and 473 are in communication with control system 410 over communication link 441. Sensor systems 491 and 492 are in communication with control system 410 over communication link 442. It should be understood that, while illustrated as separate communication links, communication links 441 and 442 could comprise a single communication link.

Sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492 could be any sensor systems capable of performing remote threat evaluation of event signals generated by potential threat events. In an example, sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492 could be capable of receiving event signals for events, processing the event signals to determine whether or not the events are threats to a perimeter, and communicating with control system 410 over communication links 441 and 442 if the events are threats.

Control system 410 could be any system or collection of systems capable of communicating with sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492, and UIS 420. It should be understood that control system 410 could be optionally capable of communicating with UIS 430. In an example, control system 410 could be capable of receiving threat messages from sensor systems 471 -473 and 491 -492 identifying threats and processing the threat messages to determine responses to the threats. For example, control system 410 could provide notification to UIS 420 or mobile UIS 430 of a threat, whereby UIS 420 or mobile UIS 430 could display the threat notification to a user. In another example, control system 410 could log threat messages for later security analysis.

UIS 420 could be any system capable of communicating with control system 410 and interfacing with a user. UIS 420 could be any type of device capable of interfacing to a user, such as a personal computer or work station. Similarly, mobile UIS 430 could be any system capable of communicating with control system 410 and interfacing with a user. Mobile UlS 430 could be any type of device capable of interfacing to a user, such as a mobile work station, handheld device, phone, radio, or pager, as well as other types of mobile devices. UIS 430 could be in communication with control system 410 over a wireless communication link well known in the art. Weather station 435 could be any system or collection of systems capable of collecting weather data and providing the weather data to sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492. It should be understood that weather station 435 could provide the weather data to control system 410, which in turn could distribute lhe weather data to sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492. While illustrated as coupled to control system 410, it should be understood that weather station 435 could be in communication with sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492 directly and could provide the weather data directly to sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492. Other variations are possible.

FIG. 5 illustrates barrier system 500 in an embodiment of the invention. Barrier system 500 includes barrier segment 501, sensor system 502, event 503, and event 504. Event 503 could be a different type of event than event 504. For example, event 503 could comprise a physical disturbance of barrier segment 501, whereas event 504 could comprise a heat or infra-red signal generated by a heat source, such as a nearby human or animal. Barrier segment 501 could be representative of barrier segments 461-463 and 481-482 as illustrated in FIG. 4. Sensor system 502 could be 5 representative of sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492 as illustrated in FIG. 4.

It should be understood sensor system 502 could be coupled to barrier segment 501 in a manner well known in the art. As illustrated in FIG. 5, event 503 could cause an event signal to be generated on barrier segment 501. For example, event 503 could represent a force generated by weather activity, human activity, or the like. The

10 resulting heat, vibration, sound, or acceleration of barrier segment 501 due to a weather force could be detectable by sensor system 502. Likewise, event 503 could represent a force generated by weather activity, human activity, or the like. The resulting heat, vibration, sound, or acceleration of barrier segment 501 due to a weather force could be detectable by sensor system 502.

1.5 FlG. 6 illustrates the operation of sensor system 502 in an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 6 could be illustrative of the operation of sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492. To begin, sensor system 502 receives event signals for event 503 (Step 610). For example, a physical force could cause a disturbance on barrier segment 501, which in turn could be sensed by sensor system 502. Examples of such a force 0 are weather activity, animal activity on barrier segment 501, or threatening human activity on barrier segment 501. Sensor system 502 could sense various characteristics of the physical disturbance to barrier segment 501, such as the magnitude of vibrations cased on barrier segment 501, or the acceleration of barrier segment 501 in a direction generally perpendicular to a vertical face of barrier 5 segment 501, as well as other characteristics. Sensor system 502 could receive the event signal in an analog form and convert the event signal to a digital form for further processing.

Next, sensor system 502 processes the event signal to determine whether or not the event is a threat (Step 620). In one example, sensor system 502 processes the 0 digital form of the event signal to determine a pattern or characteristic of the event signal. Sensor system 502 could then derive the type of the event based on the pattern or characteristic of the event signal. For instance, wind activity could create one pattern or characteristic, while human activity could create a different pattern or characteristic. In an example of the difference between wind activity and human activity, the acceleration of barrier segment 501 could generally be much greater in the case of human activity than in the case of wind activity. Likewise, the patterns or characteristics of benign animal activity could also differ significantly from the patterns or characteristics of threatening human activity, such as a human scaling barrier segment 501. Sensor system 502 could consider a threat any event that is determined to be human activity, whereas sensor system 502 could consider a non- threat any event that is determined to be benign weather or animal activity. If the event is not a threat, sensor system 502 could return Io monitoring the perimeter for threats. It should be understood that sensor system 502 could incorporate weather data provided by a weather station in evaluating the threat status of an event. For example, weather station 435 could provide data related to the direction and intensity or velocity of wind. Sensor system 502 could process the event signal in view of the weather data to differentiate between weather related events and human generated events.

Upon determining that the event is a threat, sensor system 502 proceeds to determine whether or not a supplemental signal for the event is available (Step 630). For example, sensor system 502 could receive and process an event signal for event 504. The event signal for event 504 could be considered a supplemental signal. In one example, event 503 could be a physical disturbance in barrier segment 501 that causes an acceleration signal receivable by sensor system 502. In such a case, event 503 could be the existence of a nearby entity, such as a human, generating a heat signal. Further in such a case, and assuming sensor system 502 had determined that event 503 was a threat, the heat signal generated by event 504 and received and processed by sensor system 502 could comprise a supplemental signal to the acceleration signal generated by event 503.

In the absence of a supplemental signal, sensor system 502 generates and transmits a threat message identifying the threat Io a control system (Step 640). Alternatively, in the absence of a supplemental signal, sensor system 502 could attempt to confirm the threat via communication with other sensor systems. In yet another alternative, in the absence of a supplemental signal, sensor system 502 could log the event with a control system, but without characterizing the event as a threat. In yet another alternative, in the absence of a supplemental signal, sensor system 502 could ignore the event. If a supplemental signal is available, sensor system 502 could generate and transmit a threat message identifying the event to a control system. In addition, sensor system 502 could include event and signal information in the threat message (Step 650). In one case, the supplemental signal could serve to confirm that the event is a threat. In another case, the supplemental signal could be provided to the control system, and in turn to a user interface system, as information to supplement interpretation of the threat message. For example, the existence of event 504 within a certain time period before or after the occurrence of event 503 could provide context to a threat message identifying event 503. In particular, an acceleration signal caused by an event, such as a human scaling a fence, could trigger a threat message. If a heat signal had been detected within a reasonable time period before or after the acceleration signal, the existence of the heat signal proximate in time to the acceleration signal could be provided as context to a control system, and in turn, to a user interface system. The threat message and its associated context could then be provided to the user.

Sensor System - FIG. 7

FIG. 7 illustrates sensor system 700 in an embodiment. Sensor system 700 includes signal sensor 710, interface system 720, processing system 730, storage system 740, and software 750. Storage system 740 stores software 750. Processing system 730 is linked to interface system 720. Sensor system 700 could be comprised of a programmed general-purpose computer, although those skilled in the art will appreciate that programmable or special purpose circuitry and equipment may be used. Interface system 720 could comprise a network interface card, modem, port, or some other communication device. Processing system 730 could comprise a computer microprocessor, logic circuit, or some other processing device. Processing system 730 could be distributed among multiple processing devices. Storage system 740 could comprise a disk, integrated circuit, or some other memory device. Storage system 740 could be distributed among multiple memory devices. Signal sensor 710 could comprise any sensor capable of sensing or receiving event signals, such as an accelerometer, a vibrometer, or an infra-red sensor. It should be understood that sensor system 700 could include multiple signal sensors.

Processing system 730 retrieves and executes software 750 from storage system 740. Software 750 may comprise an operating system, utilities, drivers, networking software, and other software typically loaded onto a general-purpose computer. Software 750 could also comprise an application program, firmware, or some other form of machine-readable processing instructions. When executed by the processing system 730, software 750 directs processing system 730 to operate as described for sensor system 202, 502, sensor systems 171-173 and 191-192, and sensor systems 471-473 and 491-492.

CLAIMS:

What is claimed is:

Claims

1. A security system comprising: a barrier (160); a sensor system (171, 172, 173) coupled to the barrier and configured to receive a plurality of event signals for an event, process the plurality of event signals to determine if the event is a threat, responsive to determining that the event is a threat generate and transmit a threat message identifying the event; and a control system (1 10) configured to receive and process the threat message to determine a response to the event.

2. The security system of claim 1 further comprising a user interface system and wherein the response comprises a threat notification and wherein the control system is configured to transfer the threat notification to the user interface system and wherein the user interface system is configured to display the threat notification.

3. The security system of claim I wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises an acceleration signal.

4. The security system of claim 1 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a vibration signal.

5. The security system of claim 1 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a heat signal.

6. A method of operating a security system, the method comprising: receiving a plurality of event signals for an event into a sensor system (171,

172, 173) coupled Io a barrier (160); in the sensor system, processing the plurality of event signals to determine if the event is a threat; responsive to determining that the event is a threat generating and transmitting a threat message identifying the event from the sensor system to a control system (110); and in the control system receiving and processing the threat message to determine a response to the event.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein the response comprises a threat notification and wherein the method further comprises transferring the threat notification from the control system to a user interface system and displaying the threat notification at the user interface system.

8. The method of claim 6 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises an acceleration signal.

9. The method of claim 6 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a vibration signal.

10. The method of claim 6 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a heat signal.

1 1. A sensor system (700) comprising: a signal sensor (710) configured to receive a plurality of event signals for an event; a processing system (730) coupled to the signal sensor and configured to process the plurality of event signals to determine if the event is a threat and responsive to determining that the event is a threat generate a threat message identifying the event; and an interface system (720) coupled to the processing system and configured to transmit the threat message to a control system.

12. The sensor system of claim 11 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises an acceleration signal.

13. The sensor system of claim 1 1 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a vibration signal.

14. The sensor system of claim 11 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a heat signal.

15. The sensor system of claim 1 1 wherein the control system is remote from the sensor system.

16. A method of operating a sensor system comprising: receiving a plurality of event signals for an event; processing the plurality of event signals to determine if the event is a threat; generating a threat message identifying the event responsive to determining that the event is a threat; and transmitting the threat message to a control system.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises an acceleration signal.

18. The method of claim 16 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a vibration signal.

19. The method of claim 16 wherein a first event signal of the plurality of event signals comprises a heat signal.

20. The method of claim 16 wherein the control system is remote from the sensor system.