i

RADAR DETECTOR TESTS - 2002

Developed under
Georgia Tech Research Institute Project Number A-6515
Beltronics Agreement Dated 02-15-01
Prepared by
Ekkehart O. Rausch, Spiro G. Sarris, Eugene F. Greneker
Sensors and Electromagnetic Applications Laboratory
Georgia Tech Research Institute
Georgia Institute of Technology
7220 Richardson Road
Smyrna, Georgia, 30080
Prepared for:
Beltronics, Inc.
2422 Dunwin Drive
Mississauga, Ontario
Canada L5L 1J9
1 July 2002
GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
A Unit of the University System of Georgia
Atlanta, Georgia 30332
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
ii
1 Power Level Linearity .................................................................................................................... 5
2 Calibrated Power Density at Each Frequency (2002 Data)...................................................... 6
3 Calibrated Power Density at Each Frequency (Phase 2 Data) ................................................ 6
4 Power Level Limits Output by the Synthesizer (2002 Data) ................................................... 7
5 Power Level Limits Output by the Synthesizer (Phase 2 Data).............................................. 7
6 Typical Output Files ..................................................................................................................... 12
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was funded by Beltronics Corporation. The project manager was Gene Greneker.
The task manager and test director was Ekkehart Rausch. Spiro Sarris generated the final test
matrices and graphs from the test data.
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
1
RADAR DETECTOR TESTS - 2002
1. OBJECTIVE
Beltronics, Inc. contracted with the Georgia Tech Research Institute (GTRI) to test the sensitivity
of a number of radar detectors purchased from various manufacturers. The primary objective
was to measure the radar detector sensitivity in an anechoic chamber in order to eliminate
external radiation fields that could initiate an unpredictable false alarm. The tests were
conducted at five frequencies (10.525, 24.15, 33.5, 34.7 and 35.9 GHz) and divided into three
phases. Phase 1 was completed and published in a final report dated 27 April 2001 [1]. The
Phase 1 results represent the performance of the detectors that were on the market prior to
1 April 2001. Fifteen additional detectors were purchased for Phase 2. These units represent the
detector technology that existed between 1 April 2001 and 1 September 2001. The results of the
Phase 2 detectors are found in a report published on 9 September 2001 [2]. The current results
are based on detectors that were on the market between 1 September 2001 and 1 June 2002.
These detectors were manufactured by Beltronics, Whistler, Cobra, Uniden and Snooper UK.
2. INTRODUCTION
Radar detector sensitivities obtained on the road vary with weather, soil and terrain conditions,
and are subject to reflections from other obstacles. These tests may not be repeatable and are
usually not consistent over a long period of time. The inside of an anechoic chamber is immune
to the external environment and electromagnetic fields. Therefore, anechoic measurements are
repeatable and consistent over time.
The Georgia Tech Research Institute has an indoor microwave-millimeter wave anechoic
chamber. This chamber was available for the detector tests. It measures 20 ft by 30 ft and has a
combination of 12 inch and 24 inch absorber panels. The chamber is completely shielded with a
metallic enclosure that has been tested to 100 dBm at 1 to 18 GHz and is useful into the
millimeter wave region. A picture of the interior and exterior of the anechoic chamber with a
view toward the door is shown in Figure 1. A layout of the chamber is given in Figure 2.
Figure 1. Photograph of the interior and exterior of the Georgia Tech anechoic chamber
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
2
Door
REMOVABLE
HYBRID
ABSORBERS
TRANS
MITTER
AREA
Door
RADAR
DETECTOR
AREA
20 FT
8" x 18"
Access
Panel
8" x 18"
Access
Panel
36 FT
8" x 18"
Access
Panel
6 FT
8" x 18"
Access
Panel
6 FT 22 FT
TRANSMISSION
DISTANCE
17 FT
Figure 2. Anechoic chamber floor plan
For measurements to be repeatable the power density of the radiated fields inside the chamber
must be calibrated and the test procedure must be identical for each radar detector unit. The
procedures that accomplished this goal are presented in the following sections. Section 3
describes the calibration process. The test procedure is outlined in Section 4, and the results of
the tests are discussed in Section 5.
3. CALIBRATION
Georgia Tech used three standard gain horns to calibrate the power density at the front of a
detector. For Phase 2, Horn #1, with a gain of 22.47 dB, was selected for calibration at 10.525
GHz. Horn #2 had a gain of 24.73 dB at 24.15 GHz. Horn #3 operated at the highest three
frequencies, 33.5, 34.7 and 35.9 GHz, with gain values of 23.4, 23.6 and 23.78 dB, respectively.
For the 2002 calibration, Horn #1 and 2 were identical to those used in Phase 2. Only Horn #3,
manufactured by MI-Technology - Model 12A-26, was different. The respective gains were
24.51 dB at 33.5 GHz, 24.67 dB at 34.7 GHz and 24.81 dB at 35.9 GHz.
The procedure of the calibration method was to measure the received power with the respective
standard gain horns at the frequencies of interest. The power was divided by the aperture of
the horn to obtain the power density. The effective horn aperture A was determined from
Equation 1 using the corresponding gain G of each horn at the selected frequency.
A = G (
2
/ 4 ) (1)
To simplify the calibration process, the transmitter horn was sufficiently broad to cover the 10 to
40 GHz band. Therefore, the transmitter horn did not have to be changed at different
frequencies. This single ridge, broad band, transmitter horn was obtained from Beltronics
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
3
Corporation. The transmitter horn was mounted on a plastic platform, shown in Figures 3 and
4, and connected to a Hewlett Packard synthesizer (HP 83640A), visible at the bottom of
Figure 4. Power radiated by the transmitter horn was captured on the other side of the chamber
by a standard gain horn and routed to a spectrum analyzer (HP 8565E) by means of a cable.
This calibration configuration is shown in Figure 5. The loss of the cable was not insignificant
and, therefore, was taken into account in the final calibration equations. The power density at
the standard gain horns was derived with a power level of +5 dBm as indicated on the
synthesizer display. This power level was selected because it provided a high signal to noise
ratio and, thus, accurate power readings. Higher power levels were avoided, because the
relationship between the synthesizer output power and the display at levels > 5dBm was no
longer linear, which could have led to errors in the calibration data.
Figure 3. Close-up photograph of transmitter horn
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
4
Figure 4. Plastic tower with the transmitter horn
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
5
TRANSMITTER
HORN
SUPPORT
STRUCTURE
STANDARD
GAIN HORN
TRIPOD
SYNTHESIZER
27.25"
1.75"
55"
67.5"
16.5"
SPECTRUM
ANALYZER
CABLE
Figure 5. Calibration configuration
To ensure linearity over the full range of power levels used during the tests, GTRI measured the
linear correlation between power levels read from the spectrum analyzer and the synthesizer
display at levels down to 50 dBm. In this case, the power output by the synthesizer was input
directly into the spectrum analyzer. The display was set to +5 and 50 dBm. Differences
between these numbers and the power measured at the spectrum analyzer were due to cable
and connector loss. The results of this experiment are shown in Table 1. The difference
between the high and low power readings should ideally be 55 dB as indicated by the
synthesizer display. The actual differences are shown in the right hand column of Table 1.
TABLE 1. POWER LEVEL LINEARITY
FREQUENCY
(GHz)
MEASURED
POWER @ +5 dBm
(dBm)
MEASURED
POWER @ -50
dBm
(dBm)
DIFFERENCE
(dBm)
35.9 0.3 0.1 -55 1.0 -55.3 1.1
24.15 1.6 0.05 -53.7 0.5 -55.3 0.5
10.525 1.7 0.05 -53.2 0.1 -54.9 0.1
Table 2 shows the measured power at the spectrum analyzer, as well as the gain, aperture, and
power density obtained at each frequency using the respective standard gain horns with the
synthesizer output set to +5 dBm. For comparison, Table 3 shows the calibration data collected
in Phase 2. The difference between the calibrated power densities (last column of Table 2 and 3)
is 0.9 dB, 0.6 dB, 0.7 dB, 0.5dB, and 1.5 dB for 35.9 GHz, 34.7 GHz, 33.5 GHz, 24.15 GHz and
10.525 GHz, respectively. Thus, the calibrated power density differences are under 1 dB for the
K and Ka-band frequencies and 1.5 dB at X-band. The power densities usually vary by + 2 dB
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
6
or less (which includes calibration differences) between different data sets collected at different
times of the year.
TABLE 2. CALIBRATED POWER DENSITY AT EACH FREQUENCY
(2002 CALIBRATION DATA)
FREQ. POWER AT CABLE POWER POWER HORN HORN HORN POWER
SPECTRUM LOSS AT TEST AT TEST GAIN GAIN APERTURE DENSITY @
ANALYZER PEDESTAL PEDESTAL DETECTOR
(GHz) (dBm) (dB) (dBm) (mW) (dB) (cm2) (dBm/cm2)
35.9 -45.33 5.50 -39.83 1.040E-04 24.81 302.691 16.80 -52.08
34.7 -45.33 5.33 -40.00 1.000E-04 24.67 293.089 17.41 -52.41
33.5 -44.67 5.17 -39.50 1.122E-04 24.51 282.488 18.00 -52.05
24.15 -41.50 4.33 -37.17 1.919E-04 24.73 297.167 36.44 -52.79
10.525 -40.83 2.66 -38.17 1.524E-04 22.47 176.604 114.02 -58.74
TABLE 3. CALIBRATED POWER DENSITY AT EACH FREQUENCY
(PHASE 2 CALIBRATION DATA)
FREQ. POWER AT CABLE POWER POWER HORN HORN HORN POWER
SPECTRUM LOSS AT TEST AT TEST GAIN GAIN APERTURE DENSITY
ANALYZER PEDESTAL PEDESTAL
(GHz) (dBm) (dB) (dBm) (mW) (dB) Linear Units (cm2) (dBm / cm2)
35.9 -45.00 5.00 -40.00 1.000E-04 23.78 238.78 13.27 -51.2
34.7 -45.20 4.70 -40.50 8.913E-05 23.60 229.09 13.63 -51.8
33.5 -44.90 5.00 -39.90 1.023E-04 23.41 219.28 13.99 -51.4
24.15 -41.30 3.60 -37.70 1.698E-04 24.73 297.17 36.49 -53.3
10.525 -39.30 2.70 -36.60 2.188E-04 22.47 176.60 114.18 -57.2
Tables 2 and 3 give the power densities at the detector test stand with the synthesizer display
set to a power level of +5 dBm. The power at the test stand was higher than the power
measured at the spectrum analyzer, because the measured power level was attenuated by the
cable between the spectrum analyzer and the standard gain horn. The cable attenuation was
measured again and found to be 2.7 dB at 10.525 GHz, 4.3 dB at 24.15 GHz, 5.2 dB at 33.5 GHz,
5.3dB at 34.7 GHz and 5.5 dB at 35.9 GHz. These cable losses were added to the power
measured at the spectrum analyzer to give the correct power level at the aperture of the
standard gain horn. That aperture was located at the front edge of the detector pedestal.
During the tests the front of the detectors were placed at the same location.
The power density levels in Table 2 and 3 were derived with a synthesizer power level of +5
dBm. The numbers required by the test software, however, are the synthesizer power levels
that correspond to a power density of 120 dBm/cm
2
. These levels may be computed by taking
the difference between the power densities computed in Table 2 (2002 data) and the power
density of 120 dBm/cm
2
and subtracting that difference from + 5dBm as indicated in Equation
2.
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
7
PSYN-OUT-LL = +5 dBm - [(PDENS5 - (- 120 dBm/cm
2
)] (Lower Limit) (2)
PSYN-OUT-LL is the lower limit power level at the output of the synthesizer. PDENS5 is the
power density at the detector with the synthesizer output power at + 5 dBm. The power levels
computed with Equation 2 are shown in Table 4 for 2002 data. The equivalent levels derived in
Phase 2 are given in Table 5 for comparison.
TABLE 4. POWER LEVEL LIMITS OUTPUT BY THE SYNTHESIZER
(2002 DATA)
FREQUENCY
(GHz)
POWER DENSITY
AT DETECTOR
@ +5 dBm
(dBm/cm
2
)
SYNTHESIZER
OUTPUT POWER
@ - 120 dBm/cm
2
(dBm)
35.9 -52.1 -62.9
34.7 -52.4 -62.6
33.5 -52.1 -62.9
24.15 -52.8 -62.2
10.525 -58.8 -56.3
TABLE 5. POWER LEVEL LIMITS OUTPUT BY THE SYNTHESIZER
(PHASE 2 DATA)
FREQUENCY
(GHz)
POWER DENSITY
AT DETECTOR
@ +5 dBm
(dBm/cm
2
)
SYNTHESIZER
OUTPUT POWER
@ - 120 dBm/cm
2
(dBm)
35.9 -51.2 -63.8
34.7 -51.8 -63.2
33.5 -51.3 -63.7
24.15 -53.3 -61.7
10.525 -57.2 -57.8
The original specifications were to test the detectors between 120 dBm/cm
2
and 80 dBm/cm
2
.
However, it was found that the alarm for some detectors is triggered at power densities greater
than 80 dBm/cm
2
. Hence, the upper power density limits were set to the levels in column 2 of
Table 4, which were equivalent to the maximum synthesizer output power of + 5 dBm.
It is now possible to determine the sensitivity of any radar detector by setting the synthesizer to
the lower power level and increasing the power in steps of 1 dB until the upper power limit is
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
8
obtained. At some point between the two limits, the detector will provide an audible alert. The
synthesizer output power at the alert point was converted to the actual power density with
Equations 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. These calibration equations were obtained by computing the
difference between the recorded alarm power level and the power level at 120 dBm/cm
2
and
then adding that difference to

the 120 dBm/cm
2
power density. The Power-level-Recorded is
the power output in dBm reported by the synthesizer to the LabView software when the
detector alarms. PDENS is the power density computed from measured data.
PDENS (35.9 GHz) = Power-level-Recorded + 62.9 dBm - 120 dBm / cm
2
(3)
PDENS (34.7 GHz) = Power-level-Recorded + 62.6 dBm - 120 dBm / cm
2
(4)
PDENS (33.5 GHz) = Power-level-Recorded + 62.9 dBm - 120 dBm / cm
2
(5)
PDENS (24.15 GHz) = Power-level-Recorded + 62.2 dBm - 120 dBm / cm
2
(6)
PDENS (10.525 GHz) = Power-level-Recorded + 56.3 dBm - 120 dBm / cm
2
(7)
4. TEST PROCEDURE
The radar detector test configuration is shown in Figure 6. This configuration is nearly identical
to the calibration configuration, except that the spectrum analyzer and standard gain horn were
removed. The detectors were placed onto a plastic platform, which was mounted to the top of a
tripod. The tripod height was adjusted so that the center of the detector in the vertical
dimension was at the same height as the center of the transmitter horn. A microphone attached
to the rear of the detector platform transmitted the audio alert signal to a laptop computer
external to the anechoic chamber. A photograph of the tripod, microphone and the detector is
shown in Figure 7. Masking tape was used to hold the detector in place during the test run.
The paper clip shown in Figure 7 was removed.
Small changes in range between the detector and transmitter horn had a negligible effect on the
measured power. To prove this point, the received power at range R and R + 0.5 feet is
calculated below with Equation 8.
PR = (PT GT GR
2
) / [(4
2
) R
2
L] (8)
In Equation 8 power is proportional to range squared. All other variables in that equation are
constant for this calculation. Hence, the ratio of the received powers with R equals to 17 feet
and 17.5 feet is
PR / PR + 0.5 = (17.5)
2
/ (17.0)
2
= 1.06
In dB, the power ratio is
10 log (PR / PR + 0.5 ) = 10 log 1.06 = 0.25 dB
Thus, this calculation shows that a range increase of 6 inches results in a 0.25 dB change in the
received power. Most range variations were less than 0.5 inches and, thus, negligible.
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
9
TRANSMITTER
HORN
SUPPORT
STRUCTURE
DETECTOR
TRIPOD
SYNTHESIZER
MICRO
PHONE
OUTPUT
27.25"
1.75"
55"
67.5"
16.5"
Figure 6. Test configuration
Figure 7. Tripod with detector and covered microphone
Prior to the tests, all radar detectors were stored overnight in the anechoic chamber to ensure
thermal equilibrium with the chamber temperature. In addition, the test source was turned on
and left on overnight. The tests were initiated the next morning in the following sequence:
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
10
1. The detector was placed on the pedestal facing the source at the same height. The
chamber was closed and a new file was initiated on the laptop computer labeled
with the appropriate manufacturers initials and model number of the detector.
2. As soon as the file was created the software initiated a 5 minute count down.
3. After the 5 minute warm up period, the HP synthesizer source was set to the first
frequency. The power level was increased from -120 dBm per square cm in 1 dB
steps with a 4 second period between the steps.
4. When the detector alert was initiated the power level (at the time of the alert) and
frequency were written into the file and the power level was reset to -120 dBm per
square cm. A 10-second delay was introduced before the power was increased again
as in step 3 above, but at a different frequency.
5. After all 5 frequencies were tested the detector was turned off and turned on again.
A new file was created for the second run with the same detector and steps 2, 3 and 4
above were repeated.
6. Next, the test sequence 1 through 5 was repeated with a different detector. This
procedure reduced the test time for one detector to about 30 minutes.
The test station that automated the test procedure is shown in Figure 8. It consists of a Radio
Shack Model 32-1214 audio mixer, an analog to digital converter and a laptop. The microphone
output was routed to the audio mixer to amplify the signal voltage between 0 and 5 volts. This
signal was digitized and sent to the laptop computer where it was processed by the LabView
software written expressly for this test. The LabView computer software also controlled the HP
synthesizer by means of a HP-IB link. The software provided a Windows-type display on the
laptop computer, which facilitated easy control of the waiting periods and other parameters,
primarily for debugging purposes. A view of the software control panel is shown in Figure 9.
The waiting period between the 1 dB power steps was adjusted until the software was able to
sense the audio alert, write the trigger power into a file, and plot the trigger power on the
display window. The plot served as an instant visual check of the trigger power points.
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
11
Figure 8. Automated test station
Figure 9. Display window of the radar detector test software
BELTRONICS CORPORATION PROPRIETARY INFORMATION
12
5. RESULTS
At least two files were created for each detector run. These files contained the test frequencies
and the corresponding trigger power points. An example of these files is shown in Table 4. The
B in the file name refers to Beltronics Corporation, 870 designates the radar detector model
and the 1 or 2 refers to the first or second test run for that model.
TABLE 6. TYPICAL OUTPUT FILES (PHASE 1)
FREQUENCY
(GHz)
FILE B-870-1
TRIGGER POWER (dBm)
FILE B-870-2
TRIGGER POWER (dBm)
10.525000 -45.500000 -46.50000
24.150000 -45.500000 -46.50000
33.500000 -40.300000 -41.300000
34.700000 -38.400000 -37.400000
35.900000 -36.500000 -35.500000
The power points were entered into an excel file and converted to power density by means of
Equations 3 through 7. The power densities at each frequency from the two available files were
averaged and the resultant average density displayed in matrix format. The left half of the
matrices provide the manufacturers name, model number and serial number. The right half
contains the measured detector sensitivities for two at least two runs plus the average of the
runs.
To ensure reliability and credibility of the test results five detectors purchased under Phase 1
were re-tested in Phase 2 as shown in Figure 10. The detectors included the Whistler DE1780,
Whistler DE1785, and Beltronics 870, 950 and 980. Most of the Phase 2 data agreed within 2 dB
or less with data that were collected during Phase 1. An exception to the reference data was the
Bel 870 at 35.9 GHz. This Phase 2 point varied from the Phase 1 data by 3.8 dB. The change in
sensitivity was assumed to be due to changes in the detector. Thus, the accuracy of the
measurements between test phases is estimated to be within 2 dB. The measurements for the
2002 detectors are shown in Figures 11 and 12.
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The 2002 results show that the sensitivity of the Beltronics radar detectors is superior at the K
and Ka-bands to the other detectors. In one case (primarily at 35.9 GHz) the Beltronic detectors
are almost 100 times more sensitive than the other 2002 detectors. The Snooper detectors may
be an exception to this rule, because they were intended primarily for the European market.
The sensitivities of these radar detectors may not be representative of their true capabilities,
because the police radar frequencies in Europe are, in some respects, different from those in the
United States. Thus, a retest of the Snooper detectors using the European frequencies is
recommended in the future.