Traffic Radar System with Automated Tuning Fork Test Feature
A traffic radar system (TRS) utilizing an automated test process which aids the operator in quickly conducting comprehensive system tuning fork tests that includes front and rear antennas and stationary, moving opposite, and moving same-lane operations. The automated process has the ability to select the proper radar antenna and proper mode of operation for each step of the test. The process will measure the input fork signals and report if the signals are within the specified tolerance. Optionally, the process can be set to not allow the radar system to enter the normal operating mode if the tuning fork tests have not been successfully completed.
Latest Kustom Signals, Inc. Patents:
- Traffic radar system with patrol vehicle speed detection
- Traffic radar system with patrol vehicle speed detection
- TRAFFIC RADAR SYSTEM WITH PATROL VEHICLE SPEED DETECTION
- Traffic radar system with patrol vehicle speed detection
- TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM WITH TIME TRACKING AND INTEGRATED VIDEO CAPTURE
This application claims the benefit of co-pending application Ser. No. 62/059,472, filed Oct. 3, 2014, entitled TRAFFIC RADAR SYSTEM WITH AUTOMATED TUNING FORK TEST FEATURE.
FIELDThe present invention relates to traffic radar systems for law enforcement and related applications and, more particularly to traffic radar systems in which a periodic tuning fork test is required.
BACKGROUNDTraffic enforcement systems utilizing Doppler radar technology have been in use for a number of years. Law enforcement agencies deploy these traffic radar systems (TRS) as a tool in the enforcement of vehicle speed regulations. The Court has established that a tuning fork test is an accurate method of testing the accuracy of the radar unit and along with the visual observations of a trained operator, allows for an accurate means of determining the speed of vehicles. It is typical for the law enforcement agencies utilizing these radar systems to require the operating officer to conduct periodic tuning fork tests. Typically these tests would be conducted at the beginning of the work shift.
It would be advantageous in the design of the TRS to allow for a method of an automated sequence to step the officer through the tuning fork tests before entering the normal enforcement operating mode. This automated sequence, for example, could be accomplished by displaying test prompts and messages on the device during the power up sequence.
Another improvement of the invention would be to allow the TRS, not just the operator, to verify the correct measurement during each step of the tuning fork tests.
Another desired improvement in a TRS would be to display a message to the operator for each of the tuning fork test steps indicating whether the test “passed” or “failed.”
Still another desired improvement in a traffic system would be to allow the law enforcement agency to determine the operational behavior of the TRS if the tuning fork tests were not successfully completed. One example of the TRS behavior would be for the operator to have to press a switch or button to acknowledge the failed or incomplete fork test to continue operation. Another example of the behavior would be for the TRS to not proceed to normal operation if the tuning fork tests are not successfully completed.
SUMMARYIn an embodiment of the present invention, the aforesaid may be addressed by a method for the traffic radar system (TRS) to provide an automated sequence of steps for the tuning fork tests. This new feature of tuning fork testing may be enabled in the TRS at time of manufacture. The manufacturer may enter into the TRS the measurement values of the certified tuning forks that are shipped along with the TRS. Knowing the expected measurement values of the forks allows the TRS to aid the operator in determining if the measurements are correct during the periodic tuning fork tests.
The TRS may include an option related to the fork test feature that allows the operator to skip the automated fork test sequence if the previous test sequence was conducted within a set period of time.
An additional aspect may allow an option related to the fork test feature for the purchasing agency to select if the TRS should only remind and aid the operator through the tuning fork test or to require the completion the tuning fork tests before normal law-enforcement operations can begin.
Other advantages of this invention will become apparent from the following description taken in connection with the accompanying drawings, wherein is set forth by way of illustration and example, an embodiment of the present invention.
Turning more particularly to the drawings,
First, the lower speed tuning fork is struck on a hard, nonmetallic surface and placed in front of the TRS antenna. Block 108. The speed, shown as 35 mph for PATROL 111, is displayed and the user compares the PATROL speed 111 to the speed stamped on the tuning fork. While still holding the lower speed fork in front of the antenna, a second higher speed tuning fork is struck on a hard, nonmetallic surface and placed in front of the antenna. Block 110. The primary target area 113 should display the difference between the speed stamped on the lower speed tuning fork and the higher speed tuning fork.
It is completely the responsibility of the operator to make the calculation of the difference of the two forks and to verify the displayed reading for ‘Target’ speed 113 is within tolerance. The allowed displayed reading tolerance is typically +/−1 mph (1 km/h). Block 112. An example of the possible displayed values is shown when a 35 lower tuning fork and a 65 higher tuning fork are used for the test (114).
In the preferred embodiment, the invention provides a test sequence that automatically sets the operational mode of the TRS in preparation for the tuning fork test.
Another advantage of the invention is to inform the operator as to when and which tuning fork to strike and place in front of the antenna.
To continue the fork test the operator rings the low fork (35 mph) and places it in front of the front antenna. The TRS automatically measures the fork signal, converts it to a truncated speed value and compares it to the expected low fork speed value. The measured value must be within the allowed tolerance, typically +/−1, of the expected value for the test to pass. Referring to
The next step in the fork test is for the operator to ring the high fork and place it in front of the front antenna. Another advantage to the invention is the low fork measurement from the preceding step may be saved for the calculations in the results testing in the following steps. The operator is not required to continue holding the low fork as in the traditional test (see
The next step in traditional fork test would be for the operator to calculate the difference of the high fork and low fork and ensure that the displayed value is within the correct tolerance of the difference value (see
In the preferred embodiment, the fork test for the rear antenna may follow much the same sequence as the front antenna, with the following exception. Since the moving opposite mode was tested during the front antenna tests, the moving same-direction mode may be tested during the rear antenna tests. Referring to
During the moving same-direction test for the front antenna the high fork is rung first, whereas in the moving opposite test the low fork was rung first. Previous to this invention, it would be easy for the operator to mistakenly follow the same test routine for the rear antenna, ringing the low fork first during the moving same-direction test, making it difficult it determine why the test results are not correct. Referring to
The next sequence in the tests is for the operator to ring the low fork in front of the rear antenna. In the preferred embodiment, the high fork can now be removed as the system has saved this measurement for later use in the results test. Referring to
The next step in the traditional fork test would be for the operator to calculate the sum of the high and low forks and ensure the displayed value is within the correct tolerance of the displayed sum value. The advantage of the invention is the TRS will automatically calculate the sum of the high and low fork measurements, display the results, and pass or fail the test based on the sum results being within the allowed tolerance. Referring to
It is to be understood that while certain now preferred forms of this invention have been illustrated and described, it is not limited thereto except insofar as such limitations are included in the following claims.
Claims
1. In combination with a traffic radar system, a tuning fork test method comprising:
- transmitting a radar signal from a first antenna;
- placing a first tuning fork vibrating at a first frequency in front of said first antenna;
- determining a first speed of said first tuning fork;
- placing a second tuning fork vibrating at a second frequency in front of said first antenna;
- determining a second speed of said second tuning fork;
- determining a differential speed between said first speed and said second speed; and
- indicating a pass or fail from predetermined criteria.
2. The method of claim 1 further comprising prompting a user to strike and place said first tuning fork in front of said first antenna.
3. The method of claim 1 further comprising comparing said first speed to a first expected speed.
4. The method of claim 3 further comprising determining if said first speed is within a predetermined tolerance of said first expected speed.
5. The method of claim 4 further comprising displaying a pass/fail message for said first speed for a predetermined time.
6. The method of claim 1 wherein said first speed is stored.
7. The method of claim 1 further comprising prompting a user to strike and place said second tuning fork in front of said first antenna.
8. The method of claim 1 further comprising comparing said second speed to a second expected speed.
9. The method of claim 8 further comprising determining if said second speed is within a predetermined tolerance of said second expected speed.
10. The method of claim 9 further comprising displaying a pass/fail message for said second speed for a predetermined time.
11. The method of claim 1 further comprising determining if a second antenna is present.
12. The method of claim 11 wherein if a second antenna is present,
- transmitting a radar signal from said second antenna;
- placing said second tuning fork vibrating at said second frequency in front of said second antenna;
- determining said second speed of said second tuning fork;
- placing said first tuning fork vibrating at said first frequency in front of said second antenna;
- determining said first speed of said first tuning fork;
- determining a differential speed between said second speed and said first speed; and
- indicating a pass or fail from predetermined criteria.
13. The method of claim 12 further comprising prompting a user to strike and place said second tuning fork in front of said second antenna.
14. The method of claim 12 further comprising comparing said second speed to said second expected speed.
15. The method of claim 14 further comprising determining if said second speed is within said predetermined tolerance of said second expected speed.
16. The method of claim 15 further comprising displaying a pass/fail message for said second speed for a predetermined time.
17. The method of claim 12 wherein said second speed is stored.
18. The method of claim 12 further comprising prompting a user to strike and place said first tuning fork in front of said second antenna.
19. The method of claim 12 further comprising comparing said first speed to said first expected speed.
20. The method of claim 19 further comprising determining if said first speed is within said predetermined tolerance of said first expected speed.
21. The method of claim 20 further comprising displaying a pass/fail message for said first speed for a predetermined time.
Type: Application
Filed: Oct 5, 2015
Publication Date: Nov 30, 2017
Applicant: Kustom Signals, Inc. (Lenexa, KS)
Inventors: Maurice E. SHELTON (Buffalo, KS), Michael J. BIETSCH (Nevada, MO)
Application Number: 15/537,829