Electrical Engineering

Improvised Explosive Device Detection/Destruction/Disablement

The U.S. patent system creates an environment which inspires inventors to create new or improve upon past inventions. This allows for the continuous improvement of various types of technologies. Additional influences may also be drawn from sources within a larger social context, as seen the efforts of Carlos M. Pereira, Hai-Long Nguyen, Edip Niver, Aladin H. Kamel, and Mohamed A. Salem, who were influenced by terrorist attacks which have been known to use improvised explosive devices (IED). IEDs are bombs which can be hidden in plain sight, as they can be integrated into unsuspecting, mundane objects, such as cars, computers, calculators, etc. This ambiguity and danger could be viewed as a catalyst for the need of a safe solution to handle these deadly bombs, resulting in U.S. Patent #7717023B2, “Improvised Explosive Device Detection/Destruction/Disablement.” The research behind this patent involved a collaboration between faculty and students at Stony Brook University, the U.S. Army, the New Jersey Institute of Technology, and Ain Shams University. Moreover, the funds contributed towards this invention were given by the U.S. government, indicating efforts to improve national security and assist military forces combating the use of IEDs today. The invention is designed to detect and identify IEDs within a radius of 50-100ft and can subsequently deactivate and/or destroy the explosive at a safe distance. Utilizing this technology can both improve our safety as well as take care of these disguised bombs without placing an individual in harm’s way.

U.S. Patent #7717023B2 allows for impressive integrated features in technology that was once not available. This patent has impacted the way the military can approach areas known to have IEDs in any given location. For example, instead of having to approach and search a dangerous area surrounded with hidden bombs, the military can now see if there are any IEDs in their area, and deactivate or safely detonate them without placing anyone’s life put in danger Any device that is integrated with this patent, while maintaining a satisfactory level of safety, can detect an IED using one or more methods. The methods include detecting internal battery components, magnetic signatures, chemical signatures, and any other high amounts of energy characteristics that may be present within IEDs. When an IED is detected, the device can then further characterize the IED in order to deactivate or safely destroy it by way of using a shape pulse charge (electromagnetic pulse) directed at the device in order to disrupt the bomb’s power source (battery) from a safe distance.

Carlos M. Pereira, Hai-Long Nguyen, Edip Niver, Aladin H. Kamel, Mohamed A. Salem, US Patent 7717023B2

The inventors have credited a number of other inventions prior to theirs, including U.S. Patent #6341551B1, “The Land Mine Hunter Technique,” which has the capability of detecting and neutralizing land mines for mine breaching and mine clearing; U.S. Patent #6825792B1, “Missile Detection and Neutralization System,” which can determine the precise launching point of ballistic missiles and has the ability to neutralize them as well; and finally, U.S. Patent #7071631B2, “Electromagnetic Pulse Device,” with the ability to create an electric discharge from a short circuit in a conductive coil in order to compress a magnetic field. Together these patents can be reflected in the creation of the Improvised Explosive Device Detection/Destruction/Disablement. The Land Mine Hunter Technique and the Missile Detection and Neutralization System both use wireless detection techniques for specific lethal weapons and explosives; along with the capability of deactivating them. The Electromagnetic Pulse Device brings the method of deactivation into a larger scale because it can deactivate any magnetic field, which can render any wirelessly connected bomb useless. Since IEDs are not necessarily land mines or missiles, and they can be hidden in plain sight while being connected wirelessly or with the use of motion detection, the creation of the Improvised Explosive Device Detection/Destruction/Disablement, has allowed for a rather graceful solution to a very dangerous weapons tactic.

U.S. Patent # 7717023 B2 has itself been cited by U.S. Patent #8490538, “System For Protecting Surfaces Against Explosions.” This invention can generate an explosive force intended to counteract an initial explosion by attenuating the shock wave and deflecting shrapnel. This patent is very helpful in that it provides a safety feature for the situation of a bomb that has already exploded by mitigating the damage it would have otherwise created without safe intervention. Due to the number of patents that have influenced one another involving explosives, solutions have been made for identifying a wide variety of hidden bombs as well a backup plan in case an unexpected bomb were to go off. When viewing the cited and referenced patents it became clear that this type of threat detection technology reflects the efforts of many to combat the danger of bomb threats, especially with pressure from typical terrorist attacks which have been known to use IEDs.

Since the Improvised Explosive Device Detection/Destruction/Disablement replaces the need for physical searching of IEDs (given that the device is within detectable range of said bombs), search dogs are also no longer necessary to combat IEDs. Without the need of search dogs, their lives can be spared as well. Not only that, but search dogs can be very costly for a method that only has a 75% success rate despite their heightened senses. It costs an estimated $4,000 to buy a dog trained to search bombs, and $35,000 to deploy them.^[i] It is arguably much more efficient for a device that requires little to no risk of life to locate IEDs as well as disable or deactivate it.

Although the patent possess many advantages, it is still not perfect and cannot be used in all situations. The probability of the detection system malfunctioning is presently unknown, a matter which should not be taken lightly, as a defect in the system could easily result in the fatal encounter of a live IED. An additional concern is the invention’s limited detection radius, which only reaches up to 100 ft. The invention would be useless if it were to be integrated onto a drone where detection and deactivation of IEDs would be done with a much safer and more effective rate.

By Samantha Miccio, James Romano, Bryan Taveras

^[i] Rick Atkinson, “There was a two year learning curve…and a lot of people died in those two years.” The Washington Post. Oct 1, 2007. Web. Nov 22, 2016. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/30/AR2007093001675.html?sid=ST2007092900754>

Unauthorized User Prevention Device and Method (continuation)

Gun safety in our nation, and especially around our children, has become a hot topic to discuss – not only in the media and in news outlets, but in the classroom and in technological labs. Thanks to a patented technology by Dr. Michael Recce, you can put down your gun at home with the peace of mind knowing your 10-year-old won’t be able to shoot it.

Recce’s 2004 patent, “Unauthorized User Prevention Device and Method”, does exactly that. By adding pressure sensitive sensors in the handle of the gun, unauthorized users will not be able to discharge the weapon without matching the same amount of pressure exhibited by the authorized user. When a user purchases one of these guns, he or she must first register or “save” the owner’s pressure profile into the sensor on the gun. When it comes time to shoot the gun, only the same pressure matching the profile saved will unlock the firearm allowing the weapon to discharge. Visualize this technology as a high tech bike lock. When you lock your bike, only the person knowing the code to the lock will be able to unlock the bike and ride away with it. In Recce’s technology, the code to unlock the firearm is not numbers or letters, but the biometric pressure profile of each individual person.

Recce’s invention didn’t gain much traction in a commercial perspective. That being said, it did give the idea of adding pressure sensors to other useful technologies such as cars, trains and airplanes. (He received a patent for use of this technology on airplanes in 2006, US7155034 B1). In most trains today, the lever used to control the accelerator, commonly referred to as a “dead man’s switch” is operated with an ideology that is similar to Recce’s pressure sensor. Once the conductor releases his hand of the accelerator, and essentially releasing the pressure from the switch, the train forces itself to apply the break. Recce applied for a similar patent to this specific one that will allow his technology to be implemented on commercial passenger airplanes (granted in 2006: US7155034, “Authorized Personnel Biometric Detection System Preventing Unauthorized Use Of Aircraft And Other Potentially Dangerous Instruments”). Similar to the handgun, once an unauthorized user gets control of the airplane, the aircraft will contact ground control and the unauthorized user will not be able to control the airplane.

This technology can be incredibly useful. It ensures the safety of children and other individuals who are unauthorized to handle your gun. Imagine a struggle with a police officer and a criminal where the criminal overpowers the officer and is able to take his gun. This technology will make it impossible for that criminal to be able to discharge the weapon – effectively saving multiple lives.

This technology does, however, have its flaws. As previously mentioned, the sensor operates with the pressure exerted on it by a user. There can be multiple scenarios where the authorized user of the handgun exerts too much pressure, or maybe even not enough pressure, and not have the handgun discharge. This fault can be a matter of life or death in many scenarios. People fear that there really is no way of being 100% certain that the gun will discharge when you absolutely need it to. In some cases, the authorized user might be nervous or scared and grip the gun extra tight and cause the sensor to not pick up the correct amount of pressure needed to unlock it.

Without any state supporting the development and implementation of these “smart” guns, it is up to the user to make the conscious decision to opt for a “smart” gun. However, even that is easier said than done. At present, these “smart” guns remain unavailable in gun stores and face vocal criticism from the NRA. These are among some of the issues which have contributed to the lack of commercial success for Recce’s patent. With further development funding, however, NJIT’s Senior Vice President for Research and Development, Donald Sebastian, argues that Recce’s gun could be available for market within two years.[i]

By Jacqueline Tanis, Michael Tadros, Rohit Saraiya

[i] Matt Giles, “Can A Smarter Gun Prevent A Massacre?” Popular Science, Dec. 4, 2015. http://www.popsci.com/can-a-gun-prevent-a-massacre

Authorized Personnel Biometric Detection System Preventing Unauthorized Use of Aircraft and Other Potentially Dangerous Instruments

The patent for an unauthorized device having the capabilities of being locked through biometric technology was created by Dr. Michael Recce. In 2003, he received patents on pressure/fingerprint scanners. Prior, there was nothing quite like it. The designs were an entirely new idea, something that was almost movie-like in conception. At the time of his patent, there were only physical locks to the cockpit, and safes and locked holsters for guns. There was no way of authorizing a designated user while simultaneously denying access to other persons. The process that he invented is capable of measuring multiple sensors simultaneously every 10 milliseconds. This was the answer to the problem that the market was having in regards to biometrics. Its usage is limitless and can be applied to anything that a human operates, whether it is found on a gun, an airplane, a boat, a power tool, or even construction equipment. The intended purpose of its creation was to prevent malicious use of objects, devices, or crafts. Should Recce’s invention achieve success and become widely utilized, it would result in a massive decrease in accidental and malicious deaths. This preventive measure is said to be the inventor’s chief motivation behind his work.

At the time, Recce was a professor of Information Systems at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. He recently held a Quantcast segment at IAB Engage, in 2013, discussing computer advertisement, specifically studying the way young people interpret ads and which part of the brain accepts the message of the ad. Recce currently holds five patents in three major areas: the Unauthorized User Prevention Device and Method, which is the idea that became his biometric technology; consumption history privacy, which is a way for internet advertisers to target people based on the search history while protecting the identity of the person; and assessment of risk associated with doing business with a party. One may wonder what in particular motivated the inventor’s interest in biometrics. As an owner of multiple guns, Recce was aware of the danger and peril that could befall someone when an unauthorized person takes hold of a firearm. Concerned about the safety of Americans, he created the iGun, which utilizes biometric technology to identify the user of a firearm by the signature grip and hand print. This same concern for safety led him to expand his contributions in this technology to door handles for households, industrial buildings, offices, and vehicles, as well as car keys, ignition starters for vehicles, steering wheels for cars and aircraft, and the joy-stick on an aircraft.[i]

US7155034 is a continuation of prior fingerprint scanning technologies, arguably combining pre-existing methods into one. Recce’s patent cites twenty-six patents. Among them are US 3939679, “Safety System,” a remote-controlled safety mechanism; US 8172675 B2, “Personalization Using a Hand-Pressure Signature,” the memory storing device to record the pressure applied to it; US 9341424 B2, “Firearm Locking Assembly,” a locking mechanism used to prevent any use of the item (in this case, a firearm, joystick, door handle, etc.); and US 20060025900 A1, “Apparatus, System and Method for Aircraft Security and anti-Hijacking Intervention,” a prevention to keep unauthorized pilots from manning an aircraft any kind. Recce’s patent continues the creations and inventions that use fingerprint-matching technology, by uniting the three components of a form of ultrasound, silicon, and optical technology for the Authorized Personnel Biometric Detection System Preventing Unauthorized Use of Aircraft and Other Potentially Dangerous Instruments.

Other inventors have also drawn upon Recce’s work, in biometrics and safety technologies. Patents which cite his include: US 7406368 B2, “Apparatus, System and Method for Aircraft Security and anti-Hijacking Intervention;” US 8172675 B2, “Personalization Using a Hand-Pressure Signature;” U. S. Patent #8762734 B2, “Biometric pressure grip;” US 8902044 B2, “Biometric control system and method for machinery;” US 9341424 B2, “Firearm locking assembly ;“ US 20060025900 A1, “Apparatus, System and Method for Aircraft Security and anti-Hijacking Intervention;” US 20090002161 A1, “Security System for Motorcycle Crash Helmet; ” and US 20140366714 A1, “Roman Shield Armored Vehicle (RSAV).”

The firearm is considered by many to be the most obvious and direct application of biometric detection safety systems due to its popularity among the American people: a staple instrument in the work of law enforcement and military professionals, and commonly used by the American public. Firearms are capable of causing deliberate and accidental harm in the hands of secondary users. Unfortunately, we experience both ends of that spectrum as well as everything in between. The airplane was never viewed in the same light as a gun. Mainly because they were seldom used to cause harm to others. The events of September 11th forced the United States to accept the transportation industry as a possible medium of terrorism.

It became apparent that Recce’s patent for firearm biometrics could be applied in areas not involving firearms, such as the transportation industry. Plane joysticks, tractor trailer steering wheels, and cruise ship helms could be protected courtesy of Recce’s biometric detection technology in order to prevent, or at least deter, terrorists from using these vessels to bring harm to others. This patent in particular is an example of how certain events in history, although sometimes tragic, spark innovation and creative thinking to better safeguard the public in the future. Much like the sinking of the HMS Titanic alerting the world to the need of maritime safety improvements, the terrorist attacks committed on the United States motivated inventors to create better technology to ensure the safety of the American people. It is this very thought process that fostered some of the most significant technological contributions of our day, notably, the biometric detection system patented through US7155034.

The invention process by its very nature is a scientific process that builds upon previous ideas of inventors passed. Whether changing the application of an invention or modifying it to meet current expectations of that product, technology is constantly changing to meet the needs of society. As is the case with these biometrics, which were initially intended for firearm safety and were later adapted to be applied to airplanes and other vessels.

By Naomi Segura, Brian Lallo, Robert Fullagar

[i] Giles, Matt, “Can A Smarter Gun Prevent a Massacre?” Popular Science, Popular Science. 04 Dec. 2015. Web. 06 Dec. 2016.

Alleviating Solar Energy Congestion in the Distribution Grid via Smart Metering Communications

Weather-dependent renewable energy sources, mainly solar panels, can be made small enough that consumers have the ability to harness energy without massive production plants. Most people cannot store a hydroelectric dam or a natural gas burning power plant on their property, but many have solar panels. Users harnessing their own power creates the possibility of energy generation. Power generation no longer needs to be relegated to massive power plants. Through the use of solar panels, power generation can occur at the same place that the power is consumed. As energy generation becomes distributed and focused on renewables, utility companies lose exact control over energy generation. Without this control, utility companies may be unable to address shortages and congestion properly, leading to problems for consumers. Dr. Nirwan Ansari and Dr. Chun-Hao “Thomas” Lo developed a communications system between utility customers and their utility providers in order to control which households and businesses are contributing surplus energy into the grid to address the problem of solar energy congestion.

Ansari is a distinguished professor with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, and Lo worked as a research assistant at the university while completing his PhD in Electrical Engineering. A highly productive scholar, Ansari has been attributed in nearly 700 Google Scholar publications. During his time at NJIT, Lo won a graduate student award for research relating to this patent, US 9,246,334, “Alleviating Solar Energy Congestion in the Distribution Grid via Smart Metering Communications.”

Different sources of electricity have emerged and developed over the past century, but our grid infrastructure has stayed largely the same. The electric grid in the United States is centralized around huge power plants that generate the vast majority of the electricity used in the country. Electricity is then transported from the power plant to households and businesses that rely on power for daily functions. When the demand for electricity by consumers rises or falls, utility companies use estimates to increase or decrease the productivity of power plants to meet demand. Because the existing power plants primarily utilize fossil fuels to provide energy, the patterns of usage are predictable, and therefore easily controlled. However, due to the growing implementation of solar power by consumers, utility companies have experienced increasing uncertainty regarding the necessary power productions. The power companies have lost the ability to tailor supply to demand. Solar energy is heavily dependent on dynamic weather changes and the time of day. If energy needs suddenly increase overnight, utility companies are unable to rely on power being distributed to the grid from solar energy. To minimize the risk of blackouts and other shortages of energy, utility companies have traditionally relied on easily controlled sources of energy, including coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric power plants. In the past, when utility companies experienced rapid changes in demand for energy, the utility companies quickly responded to the power need by either increasing or decreasing the rate of production.

A growing problem regarding solar panels is solar energy congestion. Increasing solar energy congestion can be directly correlated with the rise in solar panel users. While smart meters help track the expenditure of electricity more efficiently, these devices are unable to intelligently communicate with the utility companies in order to remove users producing sufficient energy from the grid. Utilizing this patent’s invention, smart meter communications would drastically reduce the data computation time and corresponding network traffic. A reduction in network traffic and data computation time is a reduction in energy costs.

The smart meter communication first determines how much energy a “unit” or house uses over an interval of time. Then, during peak periods of energy congestion, when many units are producing energy via solar panels, the smart meter communication is able to disconnect itself from the grid. The unit is disconnected from the grid when the smart meter detects a surplus of energy being produced by the unit. The smart meter communicates with the UCC in order to disconnect each unit. Once the disconnection occurs, the unit becomes self-sufficient, and solely uses energy produced by its solar panels. Electricity from the grid is then sent only to units that need it.

The use of smart meter communications will become increasingly relevant as more consumers utilize solar panels. Presently, this patent has been cited by four more recent patents, all granted to researchers at AT&T other inventors, concerning various aspects of network communications.

Why Is US Patent Number 9,246,334 a patent?

1. Patentable Subject Matter:
This patent is categorized as a process. It provides a method for already existing smart meters—power meters that send continual data to power companies regarding individual energy by utilizing radiofrequency waves, the same waves mobile phones use—to communicate more efficiently with the Utility Connection Center (UCC), and to stop transmitting data during high energy saturation periods during which users are harnessing their own energy.

2. Utility (Usefulness):
As renewable energy becomes a growing sector of the power field, companies are going to deal increasingly with the issue of over-saturation of the grid during daylight hours. This patent provides a method of solving a growing problem.

3. Novelty:
While the smart grid is a growing technology, no other inventors have proposed limiting the communications between smart meters located in the homes of users harnessing solar and the UCC during prime solar periods in order to prevent energy congestion.

4. Non-Obviousness:
A primary selling-point of smart meters for power companies is that the meters are capable of tracking exact energy usage of consumers. Therefore, it is almost outlandish to think that the solution to the problem of congestion may involve disconnecting the smart meters from communicating with the UCC for periods of time.

5. Enablement:
The creation of the system is clearly outlined in the patent, and someone with a background in the relevant field would be able to eventually recreate this technology.

By Hope Welch, Timothy Bott, Joseph Macfarlane

SaveSave

Membrane Computer Keyboard and Method

In 1979, Steve Gensler, a resident of Oakland, California, started Unicorn Engineering after creating a computer keyboard that could be used by a friend with cerebral palsy. Gensler taught himself electronics in order to build a keyboard with large, flat buttons that were programmable, so that the computer could be instructed to respond to any key in any manner desired. Gensler’s accessible computer technology start-up became IntelliTools in 1991, with Arjan Khalsa at its head. Khalsa, a teacher in the Bay Area, had become interested in accessible computer technology in the mid-1980s. Khalsa attended a class on mainstreaming special education students in the Berkeley area and was struck by the role technology played in accommodating disabilities, as well as the obstacles technology imposed when it was not designed to be accessible. Shortly thereafter, Khalsa happened to catch a radio program discussing a book on computers for people with disabilities, and he contacted the author for more information. The author directed Khalsa to a local disability and technology advocacy group, where he met Gensler. Moved by the meeting he attended, Khalsa threw himself into working with people with disabilities and computer technology.[i] Khalsa partnered with Gensler, in 1985, and then became the CEO of IntelliTools.

In 1992, Khalsa and three Intellitools engineers applied for a patent for the successor to the Unicorn Board, IntelliKeys, which was granted three years later. The patent, “Membrane Computer Keyboard and Method,” describes what made this keyboard particularly usable by people with disabilities. The patent compares a traditional keyboard to the IntelliKeys board; the former requires roughly the same level of dexterity as operating a typewriter, whereas the latter can have “keys” of any desired size and configuration and assigned for any function, making it operable by people with varying degrees of motor control. Instead of the individual keys found in a standard keyboard, IntelliKeys had a flexible membrane covering hundreds of switches. The membrane could be divided into any number of programmed sections, each covering a number of switches. Each section, or “key,” would be plotted out on a card that covered the entire membrane. As the labels on the overlay were customizable, users could display whatever symbols, colors, numbers, or words suited their needs.

When a user pressed anywhere on the overlay within an area assigned to some function, the flexible membrane would activate the switches underneath, and the computer would read the switches. This level of customization allowed the keyboard to meet the needs of any user able to press a button of any size. In addition, unlike earlier versions of adaptive keyboards, the patented invention did not require any form of interface device between the keyboard and computer, instead using a standard keyboard cable. This greatly simplified the use of the keyboard, making it functional with different computers.

In 1984, rehabilitation researchers at a Closing the Gap conference described their use of the Unicorn Model 1 Keyboard for their clients with disabilities.[ii] Their Unicorn Board could be programmed to have up to 128 keys that performed different functions (the later IntelliKeys model increased this to 576 keys). Because the keyboard was this flexible, it could be programmed to optimize the user’s interaction with it in operating specific software. That is, only those keys needed to control the desired software had to be used, and they could be the size the user could best operate; no extraneous keys would be present that the user might accidentally press. Additionally, the researchers found it advantageous that the most frequently used keys could be programmed to be those easiest to reach.

IntelliKeys found success not only in terms of commercial sales but also in recognition as a product to aid people with disabilities. In 1992, Khalsa and IntelliKeys won First Place in the Johns Hopkins National Search for Computing Technology to Benefit People with Disabilities. IntelliTools continued selling its keyboards for the next twenty years. The company was bought out by Cambium Learning in 2006 and has changed hands a few times since. In 2014, its current owner AbleNet ceased manufacture of the keyboard, having moved away from customizable keyboards. Other companies now sell similar adaptive keyboards but to be used on touchscreens not as separate peripherals. [iii]

By Dr. Elizabeth Petrick

[i] Jack Kenny, “Bridging the sensory divide,” TES Magazine, Oct. 16, 1998, www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=79600.

[ii] James H. Heller, David Salisbury, and Judith C. Lapadat, “The Unicorn Model 1 Keyboard As a Rehabilitation Tool,” in Computer Technology for the Handicapped: Proceedings from the 1984 Closing The Gap Conference, ed. Michael Gergen and Dolores Hagen (Henderson, MN: Closing the Gap, 1984), 68–70.

[iii] This article is expanded from Elizabeth R. Petrick, Making Computers Accessible: Disability Rights and Digital Technology, (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2015), pgs 48-49.

SaveSave