Radar That Sees Through Walls Built In Garage

szczys writes: Building radar in his garage is nothing new to Greg Charvat. He has a PhD in this stuff and has literally written the book (and a University course) on building your own radar system. This time around it's Phased-Array Radar. This is more than just judging the speed of a baseball or Ferrari. This rig can actually see through walls. Greg uses the example of a soda can to illustrate the quality and resolution possible from this type of system.

Comments

What's so special in walls built in garage?

[magi]

I'm sure you can use various radar-blocking materials to build walls in a garage, not just wood and plastic, but also metal. So what's so special in factory-made ones that they can't be penetrated by this radar? Is it patented? Or a government secret?

Re:What's so special in walls built in garage?

[pushing-robot]

I think the writer is saying on average people are more likely to build with plywood or drywall in their garage instead of less permissive materials like brick, concrete, or metal.

So, statistically speaking, a radar system is more effective against walls built in a garage than walls built outside of a garage.

As usual, the article may provide clarification, but I've found I can avoid the trouble of reading them by simply making wild assumptions.

Re:What's so special in walls built in garage?

[gstoddart]

Temba, his arms wide. ;-)

Re:What's so special in walls built in garage?

[wendyo]

In TFA, it said he saw "a 12 oz soda can through a 4” thick concrete wall at a stand-off range of 20".

Now the Little Brother can watch too!

[mi]

Move away, NSA and other Big Brothers — real and wannabes. The Little Brother can watch too now.

No need for time-travel. "Happy goldfish bowl to you, to me, to everyone"

Neat

[TheCarp]

This is exactly the sort of thing i love seeing a project and nice explanation on. This sort of thing will never be my career path, but, is the sort of thing I might play with as a hobby project and I love seeing the areas a person can get into without much formal training expand.

Of course, I already have a use for such a thing but.... I think it will be easier to use a small drill and a camera to find out if the rumors of my great grandmother's old safe still being in the walls somewhere (plastered over of course) is true.

Have to imagine that will be cheaper and faster (if not cooler) than building one of these.

Re:Neat

[Ogi_UnixNut]

Or use a metal detector? Chances are the safe will not be too deep in the wall, and unlike pipes and wires, which would give off short beeps, a safe would register an entire square face to the detector.

Re:in the fine print ...

[insanecarbonbasedlif]

Electromagnetic fields and public health: radars and human health, Fact sheet N226

WHO has also concluded that there is no convincing scientific evidence that exposure to RF shortens the life span of humans, or that RF is an inducer or promoter of cancer.

walls that were not built in a garage ?

[trevc]

Can it also see through walls that were not built in a garage?

Be careful making stuff cheap and easy.

[uncqual]

In KYLLO v. UNITED STATES , the Supreme Court held in 2001 that:

Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a "search" and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant.

in determining that use of a thermal imaging device whose output was used to establish cause for a search warrant was, itself, a search that required a warrant.

By making intrusive surveillance devices available inexpensively (perhaps by showing hobbyists how to build their own), such devices could move (as planes have) into "general public use" and then be usable by police without a warrant to surveil areas normally off-limits to them without a warrant.

Re:Be careful making stuff cheap and easy.

[DRJlaw]

By making intrusive surveillance devices available inexpensively (perhaps by showing hobbyists how to build their own), such devices could move (as planes have) into "general public use" and then be usable by police without a warrant to surveil areas normally off-limits to them without a warrant.

I cannot fault your analysis of that particular sentence since I'm certain that some lawyer somewhere will eventually argue that when the "not in general public use" criterion is absent it somehow becomes a "reasonable" search.

On the other hand, simply because a technology becomes available to monitor something formerly private does not mean that that technology will stay available and become something in "general public use." The now classic evolution-begets-prohibition example is radio frequency scanners. Making or using scanners to listen to analog phone transmissions for fun or profit became a bad idea, not something in general public use.

If you consider that merely listening to something that people voluntarily broadcast, in the clear, was deemed illegal, what do you think the reaction is going to be to your nosy neighbor bathing your home in artificial radiation for the purpose of peeping at things going on that are not ordinarily visible from the outside? That everyone will accept that shielding their home is impractical and simply shrug? Not once some git uses the technology to surveil a politician it won't.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion