Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
CHANDIPADAR, BERHAMPUR
A Technical report
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree of Bachelor
of Technology Under Biju Patanaik University
Of Technology
TECHNICAL SEMINAR ON
“BORDER SECURITY USING WINS”
Submitted by
Name: Monali Panda
Regd No:0701220214
Branch:E&TC
Group:02
Seminar Guided By
Er. Tripati Subudhi
SANJAY MEMORIAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
(Approved by A.I.C.T.E. New Delhi & Affiliated to B.P.U.T. Rour
kela)
Chandipadar, Bhatakumarada, Berhampur, Orissa
BONDAFIDE CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the student MONALI
PANDA of Electronics & Telecommunication engineering have under gone the live s
eminar on “BORDER SECURITY USING WINS”and has prepared this seminar report by virtue
of her diligence, adherence and advice.
She has successfully completed every aspect of this seminar with a
lot of sincerity. Her sincerity and devotion during the seminar was very much a
ppreciating.
We wish her all success for bright future.
Er .Tripati Subudhi Er.P.K.
Nayak
(SEMINAR GUIDE) (HOD, E&TC)
(PRINCIPAL) (SEAL)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before making a foray into the details of the seminar topic on “BORDER SECURITY U
SING WINS”I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude and heartf
ul obligation to all of them who have helped me in completing this seminar.
I have the greatest pleasure to offer our profound respect and sin
cere thanks to Er. P.K NAYAK (H.O.D of E&TC Engineering for his support in achie
ving in the objective of our seminar.
I also owe our friends and My Seminar Guide Er.Tripati subudhi fo
r their support and encouragement during this seminar.
Submitted by
NAME: MONALI PANDA
REGD NO: 0701220214
BRANCH: E &TC
GROUP:2
SEM:8Th
DeCLARATION
I would like to declare that I am fully responsible for the technical seminar
slide and hardcopy too for the completion and requirement. I have done it by my
self to the best of my knowledge under the guidance of Er.Tripati Subudhi.If I h
ave done some mistake, requested you to excuse me I am the student under your gu
idance.
ABSTRACT
Wireless Integrated Network Sensors (WINS) now provide a new monitoring and cont
rol capability for monitoring the borders of the country. Using this concept we
can easily identify a stranger or some terrorists entering the border. The borde
r area is divided into number of nodes. Each node is in contact with each other
and with the main node. The noise produced by the foot-steps of the stranger are
collected using the sensor. This sensed signal is then converted into power spe
ctral density and the compared with reference value of our convenience. Accordin
gly the compared value is processed using a microprocessor, which sends appropri
ate signals to the main node. Thus the stranger is identified at the main node.
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. WINS SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
3. WINS NODE ARCHITECTURE
4. WINS MICRO SENSORS
5. ROUTING BETWEEN NODES
6. SHORTEST DISTANCE ALGORITHM
7. WINS DIGITAL SIGNAL PROCESSING
8. PSD COMPARISION
9. WINS MICROPOWER EMBEDDED RADIO
10.ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
11. CONCLUSION
12.REFERENCES
FIRURE OF CONTENT
1. The wireless integrated network sensor (WINS) architecture.
2. WINS nodes (shown as disks)
3. Thermal Infrared Detector
4. Nodal distance and Traffic
5. Subnet with line capacities
6. Routing Matrix
7. WINS micropower spectrum analyzer architecture.
8. Comparator plot
1. INTRODUCTION
Wireless Integrated Network Sensors (WINS) combine sensing, signa
l processing, decision capability, and wireless networking capability in a compa
ct, low power system. Compact geometry and low cost allows WINS to be embedded a
nd distributed at a small fraction of the cost of conventional wireline sensor a
nd actuator systems. On a local, wide-area scale, battlefield situational awaren
ess will provide personnel health monitoring and enhance security and efficiency
. Also, on a metropolitan scale, new traffic, security, emergency, and disaster
recovery services will be enabled by WINS. On a local, enterprise scale, WINS wi
ll create a manufacturing information service for cost and quality control. The
opportunities for WINS depend on the development of scalable, low cost, sensor n
etwork architecture. This requires that sensor information be conveyed to the us
er at low bit rate with low power transceivers. Continuous sensor signal process
ing must be provided to enable constant monitoring of events in an environment.
Distributed signal processing and decision making enable events to be identified
at the remote sensor. Thus, information in the form of decisions is conveyed in
short message packets. Future applications of distributed embedded processors a
nd sensors will require massive numbers of devices. In this paper we have concen
trated in the most important application, Border Security.
2. WINS SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
Conventional wireless networks are supported by complex protocols that are devel
oped for voice and data transmission for handhelds and mobile terminals. These n
etworks are also developed to support communication over long range (up to 1km o
r more) with link bit rate over 100kbps. In contrast to conventional wireless ne
tworks, the WINS network must support large numbers of sensors in a local area w
ith short range and low average bit rate communication (less than 1kbps). The ne
twork design must consider the requirement to service dense sensor distributions
with an emphasis on recovering environment information. Multihop communication
yields large power and scalability advantages for WINS networks. Multihop commun
ication, therefore, provides an immediate advance in capability for the WINS nar
row Bandwidth devices. However, WINS Multihop Communication networks permit larg
e power reduction and the implementation of dense node distribution. The multiho
p communication has been shown in the figure 2. The figure 1 represents the gene
ral structure of the wireless integrated network sensors (WINS) arrangement.
In fig 6 the routes and the number of packets/sec sent from source to desti
nation are shown. For example, the E-B traffic gives 2 packets/sec to the EF lin
e and also 2 packets/sec to the FB line. The mean delay in each line is calculat
ed using the formula
Ti =1/(µc-λ)
Ti = Time de ay in sec
C = Capacity of the path in Bps
µ = Mean packet size in bits
λ = Mean f ow in packets/sec.
¬¬
The mean de ay time for the entire subnet is derived from weighted
sum of a the ines. There are different f ows to get new average de ay. But we
find the path, which has the sma est mean de ay-using program. Then we ca cu a
te the Waiting factor for each path. The path, which has ow waiting factor, is
the shortest path. The waiting factor is ca cu ated using
W = λi / λ
λi = Mean packet f ow in path
λ = Mean packet f ow in subnet
The tabu ar co umn isted be ow gives waiting factor for each path.
10.ADVANTAGES
RESPONSE TIME
The most critica e ement in border protection is response time. A radar can det
ect personne before the border is crossed and track intruders for severa mi es
after crossing, thus great y increasing response time. A fence contributes a mo
st nothing to response time.
SITUATIONAL AWARENESS
A radar/camera system provides ear y detection and rea -time tracking, substanti
a y improving response time and safety for responders. A fence mere y s ows dow
n a crosser by a minute or two. COST The cost of insta ing a fence is up to 10
times more than a radar/camera system.
EFFECTIVENESS
Proper radar/camera p acement detects and identifies everyone prior to crossing
the border, a owing agents to prioritize their response. A fence provides itt
e information to assist apprehensions.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
A fence is an eyesore which interrupts a border crossings, except the i ega
ones. Lega crossings (triba activities) and anima migrations are stopped. A r
adar tower every few mi es can detect i ega crossings, and have minima effect
on the environment.
DEATHS IN THE DESERT
Using techno ogy is much more humane than a fence since ear y detection and resp
onse can save many who now die of heat stroke or dehydration.
WHY USE TECHNOLOGIES?
The radar/camera techno ogy has been used in situations a ong the border for sev
era years, proving its effectiveness. It now needs to be app ied a ong the open
areas of the border, instead of bui ding a fence or wa .
DISADVANTAGES
Potentia y, ess disruptive to trade Cost intensive and greater resource,Disper
sion
Limited information on unauthorized
traffic
11. CONCLUSION
A series of interface, signa processing, and communication syste
ms have been imp emented in micropower CMOS circuits. A micropower spectrum ana
yzer has been deve oped to enab e ow power operation of the entire WINS system.
Thus WINS require a Microwatt of power. But it is very cheaper when compared to
other security systems such as RADAR under use. It is even used for short dista
nce communication ess than 1 Km. It produces a ess amount of de ay. Hence it i
s reasonab y faster. On a g oba sca e, WINS wi permit monitoring of and, wat
er, and air resources for environmenta monitoring. On a nationa sca e, transpo
rtation systems, and borders wi be monitored for efficiency, safety, and secur
ity.
12.REFERENCES
1.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home and
2. www.search.com/reference/U.S
3. www.amazon.com
4. wiki.answers.com
5. www.essaytown.com/topics/border_security_essays_papers.htm
6. www.dhs.gov/xtrv sec/crossingborders
7. www.abc-c io.com/product.
8. www.ehow.com